HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. – 11
Case :- BAIL No. – 8519 of 2019
Applicant :- Mayawati
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Sahu
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Heard, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.251 of 2018, under Sections 498A, Section304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Manjhila, District-Hardoi, with the prayer to enlarge her on bail.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, she is having no previous criminal history and in jail since 17.05.2019. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. It is further submitted on behalf of applicant that the deceased died by consuming poison and thereafter, the applicant and his family members brought to Rubi (deceased) to the hospital for treatment, but she could not be saved. Thereafter, information was given to the family members of the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the inquest of the body of the deceased was conducted on 19.09.2018 at C.H.C. Shahbad. Learned counsel for the applicant has also drawn attention of the Court on the inquest report, in which the Tehsildar Shahbad, District Hardoi mentioned that in-laws of the deceased along with the family members of the deceased were also present at the C.H.C. Shahbad and he has further submitted that autopsy of the body of deceased was also conducted, in which no antimortem injury was found. In the FIR, it is alleged that the body of the deceased was hidden by the in-laws of the deceased after killing her. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the statement of sister of the complainant was recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 161 Cr.P.C. which is appended as Page 32 in which she categorically stated that she was the mediator of marriage of deceased with Jeetu and the marriage was solemnized in the year of 2017, but she never received any information about demand of dowry by the in-laws of deceased. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of fact and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant -Mayawati- be released on bail in Case Crime No.251 of 2018, under Sections 498A, Section304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Manjhila, District-Hardoi, on her furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 6.9.2019