Allowed

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

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2021BAIL/12174/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant, Smt. Somvati Devi, a widow facing prosecution for dowry death and cruelty under Sections 498A IPC and D.P. Act. Granting bail based on Article 21 while expressing no opinion on merits. Bail subject to strict conditions including personal bond, sureties upon court restoration, and attendance mandates to prevent abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties (to be furnished within one month after normal court functioning) subject to strict conditions regarding trial attendance.

Smt. Somvati Devi Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12174 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Somvati Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Case called out. None appears for the complainant.

¶6

Heard Sri O.P. Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and also perused the record.

¶7

The applicant, who is mother-in-law of the deceased, is facing prosecution in Case Crime No.522 of 2019, under Sections 498A and 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police StationDibaee, District- Bulandshahr and is in jail since 27.01.2020.

¶8

Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that it is true that the deceased has consumed poison within six months of the marriage at domestic premises. The fact remains that the applicant is a widow and dependant upon his son (husband of the deceased). There is specific allegation of a four wheeler only by in-laws. Being the widow lady the applicant cannot be said to be beneficiary of the four wheeler.

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

Let the applicant Smt. Somvati Devi, who is involved in aforementioned case 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.

¶12

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO

¶13

THE EFFECT THAT HE 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.

¶14

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS COUNSEL. IN CASE OF Her ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC. (iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS 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 HIM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC. (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 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 HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. (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.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶19

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

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

¶21

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

¶22

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. Order Date :- 11.1.2021

¶24

Asha

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Somvati 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Naresh Vs State of U.P.

Parmila Devi Vs State of U.P.

Yogesh @ Shashi Kant Tiwari Vs State of U.P.

Smt Sarvati Vs State of U.P.

Dilip @ Munne Vs State of U.P.

Meharwan Singh Vs State of U.P.