HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 3684 of 2020
Applicant :- Smt. Shaista
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey,Sandeep Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sandeep Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant, Smt. Shaista, in Case Crime No. 1008 of 2019, under Sections- 498A and 302 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali City, District- Muzaffar Nagar, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submission is that the applicant is the sister-in-law (devrani) of the deceased. She has not been assigned any specific role in the offence. She has claimed that there was dispute between the husband and wife which resulted into death of the deceased. She has been falsely implicated in this case. The marriage of the deceased took place 16 years ago and the marriage of the applicant took place 14 years ago. It is a case of false implication by way of making allegation of demand of dowry. After such a long period of marriage there cannot be any demand of dowry. Theapplicant is in jail since 21.10.2019 and has no criminal history to her credit.
Learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicants but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail.
Let the applicant- Smt. Shaista, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.
Order Date :- 6.2.2020