HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 48

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 42604 of 2019

Applicant :- Smt. Meena

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Lal Vijai Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hardev Prajapati

Hon’ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.

Heard Sri Gorav Singh, Advocate under the authority of Sri Lal Vijai Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri J.K. Upadhyay, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 0084 of 2019, under Sections 498A, Section304B, Section506 of I.P.C and 3/4 of SectionDowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station, Arnia Nagar, District Bulandshahr.

As per prosecution case, marriage of the deceased Pratibha was solemnized with the son of applicant on 14.2.2019 and she died on 19.4.2019 after hanging herself.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the deceased was having affair with one Ankit, who also committed suicide on 14.4.2019. It has been argued that the applicant is a mother-in-law of the deceased and only general allegations have been levelled against her. Lastly, it has been argued that she is in jail since 24.6.2019 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal and therefore, she be released on bail.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.

Considering the totality of the case, in particular, the fact that the applicant is a mother-in-law, only general allegations have been levelled against her and she is in jail since 24.6.2019 and trial may take some time for final disposal, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

Let the applicant Smt. Meena, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A I.P.C.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.

(v) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

The application is, accordingly, disposed of.

Order Date :- 28.11.2019

AKK