Allowed

Anju @ Anjum v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2019BAIL/10548/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court considered the case of Anju @ Anjum charged under dowry-related offenses. The court observed her age, lack of criminal history, and the suicide allegations. It held the case fit for bail and allowed it subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.

Anju @ Anjum Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10548 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Anju @ Anjum Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Chowdhury Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Rai (B.H.), learned counsel appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against three accused persons, namely, Asif Shekh, Najim Shekh and Anju alleging that Munefa Bibi, sister of the complainant was married with Asif Shekhj on 18.5.2018. For demand of Rs. 2 lac, they assaulted and killed her.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and is an old lady and is languishing in jail since 5.1.2019 (more than two months) having no criminal history. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. General role has been assigned to the applicant. This is a case of suicide. She had no concern with the so called demand of dowry and she is not beneficiary of the same. She is living separately. She has committed suicide herself and the reason better known to her. F.I.R. was lodged on 18.12.2018 on the basis on an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. The cause of death was found handing. Nobody is responsible for death of the deceased. There is no independent witness against the applicant. There is no eye witness account and in case she is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Anju @ Anjum involved in Case Crime No. 907 of 2018, under Section 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Sigra, District-Varanasi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like

¶11

amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶15

4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶16

5.The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 13.3.2019 OP

Anju @ Anjum v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anju @ Anjum v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sabiya Khatoon Vs State of U.P.

Arman Ali Vs State of U.P.

Vimlesh Alias Mukhiya Vs State of U.P.

Subhash Vs State of U.P.

Chanda Vs State of U.P.

Jyoti Vs State of U.P.