Allowed

Smt. Uma Sharma and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2019BAIL/15685/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application regarding deceased wife at death, asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. The court allowed bail for applicants without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by personal bond and two sureties each, subject to standard conditions regarding tampering, witness intimidation, court appearance, and committing similar offences.

Smt. Uma Sharma and Another Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15685 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Uma Sharma And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamta Prasad Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri R.K. Singh, learned brief holder for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged by the informant against five accused persons namely, Gaurav Sharma (husband), Vinod Sharma (father-in-law), Uma Sharma (mother-in-law), Saurabh Sharma (devar) and Shailu Sharma (nanad) alleging that the marriage of deceased Deepa was solemnized with Gaurav Sharma on 8.2.2015, they demanded dowry as rupees five lacs from the deceased for which the deceased was being tortured by them and on 10.12.2018 they killed her. According to postmortem report, cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant no. 1 is the mother-in-law of deceased and applicant no. 2 is father-in-law of deceased. They are old aged persons. The applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegations against the applicants. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicants. Offences levelled against the applicants are not attracted in the present matter. They have no concern with the demand of dowry and they are not beneficiary of the same. Applicants have no concern with deceased and her husband. They are living separately. Deceased has committed suicide herself. They are languishing in jail since 6.3.2019 (more than one month) having no criminal history and in case they are released on bail, they 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 applicants and admitted that applicants have 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 applicants Smt. Uma Sharma and Vinod Sharma involved in Case Crime No. 174 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Madhaugarh, District Jalaun be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

4.The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶15

5.The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 16.4.2019 A. Singh

Smt. Uma Sharma and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Uma Sharma and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munshi Lal Vs State of U.P.

Chandrawati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Ramwati Vs State of U.P.

Sona Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Saleem Rizvi Vs State of U.P.

Ram Giri Vs State of U.P.