SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Meena Devi vs State Of U.P. on 6 March, 2020


?Court No. – 69


Applicant :- Smt. Meena Devi

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Singh Chahar

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Banshi Lal

Hon’ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

Heard Sri Kuldeep Singh Chahar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Banshi Lal, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Shoeb Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

This anticipatory bail application (u/s 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 0024 of 2020, under sections 498A, 304B IPC and section D.P Act, Police Station New Agra, District Agra during pendency of investigation.

As per F.I.R., marriage was performed of the deceased with the co-accused Manish on 8.11.2019 but soon thereafter demand of additional dowry of Rs. 10,00,000/- was being made and for non fulfillment of the same, deceased was done to death. Death has occurred in her matrimonial home within two months of her marriage.

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that she has apprehension of imminent arrest. Deceased has committed suicide because of being patient of depression. She was given treatment too, papers regarding which are annexed at annexure-6. It is also pointed out that earlier too, prior to her marriage, she had consumed some poisonous drugs in order to commit suicide and to establish this fact, attention of the Court is drawn towards the telephonic conversation, documents regarding which is annexed at Annexure-7. Victim is found to have died on account of ante-mortem hanging. Hyoid Bone was found intact, therefore this is a suicide case. It is also established by the site-plan, documents regarding which are annexed at page no. 23 of the paper book that the door had to be broken before entering the room where the victim had committed suicide. She has no criminal history. If released on bail she would not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the investigation.

Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer of grant of anticipatory bail and argued that accused applicant has role in commission of this offence as deceased had died within two months of marriage.

Taking into consideration the gravity of accusation, whatever argument has been made by learned counsel for the applicant is a matter of evidence, death of the deceased has occurred within seven years of marriage and offence is of serious nature and there being possibility of her fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court does not find good ground for enlarging the applicant, Smt. Meena Devi on anticipatory bail in this case.

The anticipatory bail application of the applicant Smt. Meena Devi, is, accordingly, rejected.

Order Date :- 6.3.2020

A. Mandhani



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