Allowed

Smt. Shobha Sahu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Mar 2019BAIL/9851/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to the applicant, Smt. Shobha Sahu, who was alleged to have falsely implicated in the dowry death of her daughter-in-law. Considering complicity, severity, co-accused bail status, and facts, the Court found it fit for bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties under conditions of cooperation, no evidence tampering, and no unlawful activities.

Smt. Shobha Sahu Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9851 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Shobha Sahu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Daga Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Short counter affidavit along with Vakalatnama filed by Shri Ray Sahab yadav, Advocate on behalf of first informant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A., Shri Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel for first informant and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant has been falsely implicated for causing dowry death of Smt. Geetanjali Sahu being mother-in-law of deceased; that no specific role has been assigned to applicant regarding demand of dowry or treating deceased with cruelty for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry; that as per averments made in F.I.R. marriage of Geetanjali Sahu was solemnized with Vikas Sahu about 8 months ago and she was beaten by her husband and in-laws for nonfulfilment of demand of dowry apart from which her husband used to beat her daily under intoxication and on 15.11.2018 she was hanged to death; that as per postmortem report of deceased her death was caused due to asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging; that applicant neither made any demand of dowry nor treated deceased with cruelty for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry; that from averments made in F.I.R. it appears that husband of deceased was addict of liquor and under intoxication used to beat her and due to dispute between husband and wife, she appears to have committed suicide; that applicant was living separately with her husband, who is posted as Branch Manager of Punjab National Bank, Babina Branch and was living there at Babina in a rented accommodation vide rent note dated 29.10.2018 at Annexure-11; that co-accused Mohit Sahu (Jeth) and Raj Kumar Sahu (father-in-law) have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 25.2.2019 and 5.3.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.8033 of 2019 & 8825 of 2019, copies of which have

¶8

been produced for perusal and are taken on record; that case of applicant is distinguishable from husband of deceased; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that she will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 19.12.2018.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for first informant vehemently opposed prayer of bail and contended that applicant is one of the main culprit; that another daughterin-law of applicant died in unnatural circumstances due to burn injuries in which case she ascertained acquittal by getting witnesses hostile and of which acquittal order appeal is pending before this Court wherein applicant is on bail and has given undertaking on 15.10.2018 that she will not change her residence and if changes, shall inform the Court; that in view of above undertaking rent note at Annexure-11 is a forged and fictitious document; that applicant, if released on bail, shall misuse liberty of bail and delay and defraud fair disposal of trial.

¶10

In reply learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant was falsely implicated for death of his another daughter-in-law wherein she was acquitted and by mere filing of appeal applicant may not be held guilty; that applicant has not infringed any undertaking and her permanent address is still Jhansi and due to posting of her husband outside Jhansi in the township Babina, she is temporarily living there.

¶11

Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused 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.

¶12

Let applicant Smt. Shobha Sahu be released on bail in Case Crime No.701 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Jhansi, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant will co-operate with 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 she is

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.3.2019 T. Sinha

Smt. Shobha Sahu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shobha Sahu 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

Smt. Preeti Vs State of U.P.

Avanish Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Om Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Naushad Vs State of U.P.