Allowed

Smt. Mithlesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Jan 2019BAIL/47037/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application filed by a mother-in-law accused of culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Court found the case fit for bail subsequent to examining counsel and record, granting release on bond and sureties. No substantive judgment on merits rendered at the stage of the bail order.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail in Crime No. 284 of 2018 subject to personal bond and sureties.

Smt. Mithlesh Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47037 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Mithlesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated being mother-in-law of deceased; that deceased was married with applicant's son Mahendra about 13 years ago and applicant had no reason or motive to cause her death; that F.I.R. has been lodged by father of deceased upon information furnished by neighbour Tilak Raj; that eye witnesses of the incident Tilak Raj and Tinku have stated that in the evening of 29.8.2018 upon hue and cry from the house of Mahendra when they reached, seen that Mahendra and applicant were catching hold of deceased and co-accused Vinod and Guddo were giving knife blows as well as blows with cooker to deceased resulting in her death after which they fled away from the house; that applicant did neither catch hold of deceased nor caused any injuries to her rather she was away from home at the time of incident; that case of applicant is distinguishable from co-accused Mahendra, Vinod and Guddo; that applicant is entitled for bail in view of provisions of Section 437(i) of Cr.P.C.; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 31.8.2018.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that fatal injuries were caused to deceased by coaccused persons when she was over-powered by applicant.

¶8

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶9

Let the applicant Smt. Mithlesh be released on bail in Case Crime No.284 of 2018, under Sections 302, 34 I.P.C., P.S. Nagina, District Bijnor, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶10

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.

¶11

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶13

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶14

Order Date :- 17.1.2019 Kpy

Smt. Mithlesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Mithlesh 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

Dhanpat Vs State of U.P.

Ali Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P.

Avinash Gautam @ Panu Vs State of U.P.

Sazid Vs State of U.P.

Kiran Chandra Verma Vs State of U.P.