The court allowed bail to the applicant, Bahetara Devi, in a case involving offences under IPC Sections 498-A, 304-B, and 201. The applicant was noted as the mother-in-law of the deceased with no specific role assigned in the FIR regarding the cause of death.
Release from jail on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31196 of 2019
Applicant :- Bahetara Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamal Dev Singh Chanchal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Criminal Misc. Case No. 4020 of 2019 (State Vs. Jagdish & others) arising out of Case Crime No.79 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Saiyyadraja, District Chandauli.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased and no specific role for causing death of the deceased has been assigned to her in the FIR.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court towards the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC, in which specific role of pouring kerosene oil and setting her ablaze has been assigned to her husband and the applicant is said to have taken her to hospital.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is in jail since 24.06.2019 and has no criminal history to her credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and there is no chance of her fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses in any manner.
Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC, specific role of pouring kerosene oil and setting her ablaze has been assigned to the husband of the victim and the applicant is said to have taken her to hospital.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Bahetara Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 30.10.2019 Zafar
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail in a case involving offences under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 201 IPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bahetara Devi
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
