SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Angoora Alias Urmila vs State Of U.P. on 13 January, 2020


?Court No. – 68


Applicant :- Smt. Angoora Alias Urmila

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Sri Umesh Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel filed Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, is taken on record.

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

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. The FIR has been lodged against 5 persons including the applicant making general allegation. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured to the deceased. There is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence. As per postmortem report the cause of death has been shown asphyxia due to ante mortem throttling. Three injuries have been found on the body of the deceased. The applicant has neither committed any marpit with the deceased nor committed the alleged offence. At the time of alleged incident the applicant was living separate from the deceased and her husband. In the statements of Dhoom Singh, Munendra Pal, brothers of deceased and Smt. Guddi Devi, mother of the deceased it has come that at the time of alleged incident the applicant was living separate from the deceased and her husband. It has further been submitted that applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. She has falsely been implicated due to being mother of husband of deceased. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of husband of the deceased. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 21.9.2019.

Per contra; learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the FIR. After investigation the I.O. has submitted charge-sheet only against the applicant and husband of the deceased. It has further been submitted that in the statements of witnesses it has come that the behaviour of applicant was not good with the deceased and quarrel used to take place in between them. The applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, she is not entitled for bail.

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

Let the applicant Smt. Angoora alias Urmila involved in Case Crime No. 227 of 2019, under section 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Bisauli, District Badaun be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with 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 evidence.

2. She shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the trial.

3. She shall 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 :- 13.1.2020




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 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