Allowed

Smt. Suman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2019BAIL/7131/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application allowed. The Court held that it is a fit case for bail for the applicant, who had no criminal history and was falsely implicated in a case involving alleged dowry death. The Court expressed no opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the same amount, subject to specific conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7131 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Suman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Krishan Mohan Mishra,Akash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Mishra (B.H.) learned counsel appearing for for the State and perused the record.

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons, namely, Abhinav Tiwari, Anil Kumar, Suman Sharma, Shilpa and Sweta alleging that on 3.12.2018 Anjana daughter of the complainant was married with Abhinav Tiwari on 18.4.2018. For demand of costly Car they killed her.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is motherin-law of the deceased and she is an old lady and is languishing in jail since 5.12.2018 (more than two and half months) having no criminal history. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. General role has been assigned to all accused. This is a case of suicide. She has no concern with the so called demand and she is not beneficiary of the same. They are living separately. She has committed suicide herself. There is no independent witness against the applicant. There is no eye witness account and in case she is released on bail, she 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 applicant and admitted that applicant has 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 applicant Smt. Suman involved in Case Crime No. 502 of 2018, under Section 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Jaswant Nagar, District-Etawah 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 applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is

¶15

suspected.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 20.2.2019 OP

Smt. Suman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Suman 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mustkim Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Malhotra and 2 Others Vs State of Up and 2 Others

Smt. Kusum Devi Vs State of U.P.

Tej Singh Vs State of U.P.

Nattho Devi Vs State of U.P.

Mahanand Dwivedi Vs State of U.P.