Allowed

Smt Saraswati Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2020BAIL/37026/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under sections 498A, 304B IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act, the High Court allowed the bail of the mother-in-law, noting her age and ailments. Bail was granted on personal bond without sureties initially, subject to strict conditions for trial attendance and swift trial conclusion.

What did the court decide?

Applicant granted bail on personal bond without sureties initially; sureties to be furnished within a month of court restoration.

Smt Saraswati Singh Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37026 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Saraswati Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Khalid Mahmood Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Heard Shri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Khalid Mahmood, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application filed on behalf of Smt. Saraswati Singh seeking her bail in connection with Case Crime No.211 of 2020, u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.-Jiyanpur, District-Azamgarh.

¶7

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the F.I.R. was got registered by the father of the deceased on 12.7.2020 at Police Station Jeeyanpur, District Azamgarh against Ashwani Singh (husband of the deceased) and all the members of his family. The text of the F.I.R. is that the deceased got married with Ashwani Singh on 25.2.2019 according to Hindu Rites but for an unspecified amount of additional dowry the husband and her in-laws jointly killed her by setting her ablaze. I have perused the post-mortem report which shows that the deceased has died on account of superficial deep burn all over the body. From the F.I.R. itself it is borne out that the husband and all family members are residing in Kolkata for last fifteen years. In a marriage ceremony they had come to Azamgarh from Kolkata where this unfortunate incident took place. It is further contended that the deceased was suffering from epilepsy and undergoing treatment for the same. It is just possible that in a fit of epileptic attack this unfortunate incident might have taken place. There is no demand of additional dowry in the F.I.R. and as per the prevailing practice in the society now-a-days this F.I.R. has been lodged to exploit the unfortunate incident of the deceased. Contention is that the applicant is an old age lady and is suffering from numerous ailments. The husband of the deceased is still in jail. There is no dying declaration of the deceased. It is also contended that the case of applicant, being mother-in-law of the deceased, is distinguishable from the husband who is said to be the first person responsible to maintain the welfare and safety of his wife. The applicant is in jail since 12.7.2020 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 Saraswati Singh, who is involved in aforesaid Case Crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT SHE 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.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(iv) THE APPLICANT 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 APPLICANT IS DELIBERATE

¶15

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 HER 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 APPLICANT.

¶17

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

¶18

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-:

¶19

1. The applicant 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.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her 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.

¶24

Order Date :- 19.11.2020 M. Kumar

Smt Saraswati Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Saraswati Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Krishnpal@ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Dharm Pal Vs State of U.P.

Smt Babita Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Prem Singh Vs State of U.P.