SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Deep Mala vs State Of U.P. on 20 December, 2019


?Court No. – 68

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 51115 of 2019

Applicant :- Deep Mala

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Shahroze Khan

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hari Narayan Singh

Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A and perused the record.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. Referring to the postmortem report it is also argued that the cause of death shown in the postmortem report is accidental injuries. It has further been submitted that if entire prosecution case taken into consideration then also husband and the deceased both have gone to see the fair. There is general allegation in the FIR. It is next contended that FIR was lodged belatedly and no plausible explanation has been given. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of the husband of the deceased. Co-accused Akhilesh Soni (devar of the deceased) and Hanuman Prasad (father-in-law of the deceased) have already been released on bail by another bench of this Court and by this court vide orders dated 7.11.2019 and 4.12.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46123 of 2019 and 53770 of 2019 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. There is no criminal history of the applicant and she is in jail since 2.6.2019.

Per contra, learned A.G.A and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that as per post mortem report four injuries have been found on the body of the deceased and cause of death of the deceased has been shown hemorrhagic shock due to ante mortem injuries and fracture. The deceased was harassed and tortured due to non fulfilment of demand of dowry. The applicant and other co -accused have committed the alleged offence, therefore, applicant is not entitled for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Deep Mala involved in Case Crime No. 27 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 304B, SectionIPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Pathara Bazar, District Siddharth Nagar be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.

2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and she will co-operate with the trial.

3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

Order Date :- 20.12.2019




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation