SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

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


?Court No. – 69


Applicant :- Smt. Suman

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Tapan Kumar Mishra

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

Heard Sri Tapan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri G.P. Singh , 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. 996 of 2019 under sections 498A, 304B of IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dadari, District Gautambudh Nagar, during the pendency of investigation.

As per FIR which has been lodged by the brother of the deceased against the accused-applicant and two others, who are mother-in-law, father-in-aw and Dewar that the deceased has been done to death for non-fulfillment of additional dowry.

Submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant is that this FIR was got registered by the husband of the deceased through his brother-in-law in order to grab the property of the applicant, who had married subsequently co-accused Raj Kumar and out of the wedlock Sachin was born. There was property dispute between Sachin and Monu. Monu was son of the accused-applicant from earlier husband. She has been falsely implicated. She has no criminal history. She has apprehension of imminent arrest. If released on bail she would not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the investigation.

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has drawn attention to post mortem report, which discloses cause of death to be Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem handing and ligature mark was also found at the neck of the deceased. Hyoid bone was found fractured.

Looking to the fact that the deceased had died inside the house in which the accused applicant was living and the husband of the deceased has also supported the version of FIR in the statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., hyoid bone has been found to have been fractured, taking into consideration the gravity of accusation, 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. Suman on anticipatory bail in this case.

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

Order Date :- 6.3.2020




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


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