Allowed

Smt. Poonam v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Jun 2021BAIL/20705/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge criminally dismissed arrest history and granted bail to applicant in 498-A, 304-B IPC case pending under heavy pendency with imprisoned mother-in-law accused of dowry-related death others.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to specified conditions regarding evidence tampering and pandemic lockdown.

Smt. Poonam Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20705 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Poonam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and gone through the record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant-Smt. Poonam, who is involved in Case Crime No. 467 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police StationDaurala, District-Meerut.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case; the applicant is mother-inlaw of the deceased. On 14.10.2020, brother of the deceased reported at the police station that his sister has committed suicide by hanging. Copy of the G.D. entry in this respect is on record. Subsequently F.I.R. has been lodged by the first informant with the allegation that the applicant and her other family members have committed murder of his sister on account of non-fulfillment of demand of additional dowry. The cause of death was asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. There is no other visible injury on the dead body of the deceased except ligature mark.The applicant is in jail since 16.01.2021 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial and thus, the applicant is entitled for indulgence.

¶8

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

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without touching the merits of the case, the accused applicant is entitled for bail.

¶10

Let the above mentioned applicant involved in aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶11

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, shall cooperate in the investigation or trial and will not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶12

In case of breach of any of the conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶13

However, if due to Covind-19 pandemic, the Sub-ordinate Court is under lockdown, 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.

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

It is made clear that in the event the Sub-ordinate Court is functional as usual then the normal procedure/ mode of filing bail bonds and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned will be adopted.

¶17

Order Date :- 14.6.2021

¶18

MN/-

Smt. Poonam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Poonam v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghavendra @ Rajuraja Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

Rameshwar Maurya Vs State of U.P.

Rinku Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Alias Deepak Malik Vs State of U.P.

Babbu @ Vijay Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P.

Anil Yadav Vs State of U.P.