Allowed

Smt. Saraswati Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Dec 2019BAIL/49036/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to a mother-in-law in a case involving the death of her son-in-law. The court found it a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the charge, noting the applicant had no direct evidence against her, no criminal history, and no dispute of dowry demand.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions.

Smt. Saraswati Devi Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49036 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Saraswati Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Ji Singh,Balendra Deo Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. The marriage of deceased was solemnized with the son of applicant namely Sonu on 6.6.2014. There are two children from the wedlock of deceased and her husband and both the minor sons are in jail with the applicant. In postmortem report one contusion has been found on the head of the deceased and cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained, therefore, viscera was preserved. In viscera report Aluminium Phosphate poison has been found to the deceased. It appears that the deceased consumed some poisonous substance due to dispute with her husband. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. There is no direct evidence against the applicant. She has not committed the alleged offence. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured to the deceased. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of husband of the deceased. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 2.9.2019.

¶7

Per contra; learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶9

Let the applicant Smt. Saraswati Devi involved in Case Crime No. 66 of 2019, under section 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Sukhpura, District Ballia be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶11

She shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the trial.

¶12

She shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 5.12.2019 Masarrat

Smt. Saraswati Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Saraswati Devi 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

Asarfi Devi Alias Guddi Vs State of U.P.

Jay Ram Vs State of U.P.

Amar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Yogendra Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Manju Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Soni Vs State of U.P.