Allowed

Smt Shripati Devi and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Nov 2020BAIL/36250/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by the deceased's parents-in-law in a suicide case involving charges of dowry harassment and culpable homicide. The court imposed specific conditions regarding court attendance and trial conclusion timelines while deferring the requirement of sureties until normal court functioning is restored.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond without sureties pending court restoration; strict conditions imposed regarding court attendance and trial conclusion.

Smt Shripati Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36250 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Shripati Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Munna Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application filed on behalf of Smt. Shripati Devi and Ramharsh seeking their bail in connection with Case Crime No.481 of 2020, u/s 323, 306, 498A I.P.C., P.S.Ramgarhtal, District-Gorakhpur.

¶7

Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are parent-in-law of the deceased. An F.I.R. in this case was got registered by the daughter of the deceased on 16.7.2020 against her uncle, aunt, grandfather and grandmother for the alleged misbehaviour qua her mother resultantly she has taken this extreme step by hanging herself. Admittedly to the prosecution, the marriage was solemnized about 22 years back. It is further contended that there is no positive assertion with regard to abetment or goading on the part of applicant to take such extreme step by the deceased. Further contention is that it is just possible that there is constant quarrel between the family but certainly this could not be the sufficient cause for taking this extreme step. The applicant are in jail since 22.7.2020 having no criminal antecedents.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Smt. Shripati Devi and Ramharsh, who are involved in aforementioned Case Crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to

¶11

following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) THE APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES ARE PRESENT IN COURT. IN CASE OF DEFAULT OF THIS CONDITION, IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT IT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PASS ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶13

(ii) THE APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS COUNSEL. IN CASE OF THEIR ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶14

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANTS MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANTS FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶15

(iv) THE APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANTS IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶16

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANTS.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶20

1. The applicants shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶21

2. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶22

3. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶23

4. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶24

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicants, shall have serious repercussion on their bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶25

Order Date :- 18.11.2020 M. Kumar

Smt Shripati Devi and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Shripati Devi and Another 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Urmila Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jeet Vs State of U.P.

Krishnpal@ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Dharm Pal Vs State of U.P.

Laxmina Vs State of U.P.