This is a bail application regarding a dowry death case. The applicant denied involvement and false implication. The High Court granted bail without expressing an opinion on merits, imposing standard conditions.
Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions to not tamper with evidence and to appear at trial dates.
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. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47300 of 2019
Applicant :- Manorama Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanendra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the deceased and has not compelled the deceased to commit suicide. The deceased herself consumed poison. It has further been submitted that there is general allegation against the applicant. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. At the time of the alleged incident the applicant was not present at his house and she had gone to do the work in filed. The deceased has committed suicide herself. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. The applicant is aged about 55 years and she is suffering from several aliments. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of the husband of the deceased. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 3.9.2019.
Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the deceased was harassed and tortured due to non fulfilment of demand of dowry. The deceased died less than two years of her marriage an unnatural death. The applicant has committed the alleged of offence, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Manorama involved in Case Crime No. 128 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 304B, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kopaganj, District Mau be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
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 :- 28.11.2019
A.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant, who denies guilt and claims false implication, is entitled to bail in a dowry death case involving Sections 498A and 304B IPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Manorama
State of U.P.
Bachchoo Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
