SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Manorama vs State Of U.P. on 28 November, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 68

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 47300 of 2019

Applicant :- Manorama

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanendra Prakash Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Pandey

Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

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

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the deceased and has not compelled the deceased to commit suicide. The deceased herself consumed poison. It has further been submitted that there is general allegation against the applicant. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. At the time of the alleged incident the applicant was not present at his house and she had gone to do the work in filed. The deceased has committed suicide herself. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. The applicant is aged about 55 years and she is suffering from several aliments. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of the husband of the deceased. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 3.9.2019.

Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the deceased was harassed and tortured due to non fulfilment of demand of dowry. The deceased died less than two years of her marriage an unnatural death. The applicant has committed the alleged of offence, therefore, the 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 Manorama involved in Case Crime No. 128 of 2019, under Sections 498A, Section304B, Section504, Section506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kopaganj, District Mau 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 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 :- 28.11.2019

A.

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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