SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Smt. Sushila Devi vs State Of U.P. on 19 December, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 68

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 56433 of 2019

Applicant :- Smt. Sushila Devi

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Ali Hasan,Haya Rizvi

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Sri Sanjay Kumar, 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. She has falsely been implicated in the present case. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured to the deceased. There is general allegation against the applicant. No specific role has been assigned to her. As per postmortem report the cause of death could not be ascertained, therefore, viscera was preserved. Viscera report has not been received. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of husband of the deceased. The co-accused Anuj @ Bhoora, Dewar of the deceased has already been released on bail by this court vide order dated 5.12.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 52406 of 2019, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 3.8.2019.

Per contra; learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the deceased was harassed and tortured by the applicant and other co-accused for non fulfillment of demand of dowry. The deceased died an unnatural death within 2 and 1/2 years of her marriage, therefore, the applicant 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. Sushila Devi involved in Case Crime No. 276 of 2019, under Sectionsection 498A, Section304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Nanauta, District Saharanpur 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 :- 19.12.2019

Masarrat

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2020 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