Allowed

Smt.Pushpa v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko

Allahabad HC30 May 2022/1564/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application challenging a summons against the accused, mother-in-law of the deceased, who was arrested for alleged dowry death. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed bail, finding it appropriate to enlarge accused on bail considering the complainant’s statement and separation of living quarters.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court and not seek adjournments.

Smt.Pushpa Vs State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 12

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1564 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt.Pushpa Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Samad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR No.294 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Shivgarh, District Raebareli.

¶7

Accused-applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased, Komal, who got married with the son of the accused-applicant, Deepak four years before the date of incident. Out of the wedlock, a son was born, who was two years of age when the incident took place. It is alleged that the accused-applicant and her son used to torture and harass the deceased and would subject her to cruelty from the date of marriage. On the date of incident, the complainant, father of the deceased, got the information that the deceased had died.

¶8

Post-mortem report would suggest the following antemortem injury on the body of the deceased:-

¶9

"Contusion swelling present on both side of neck measuring Rt. side 3 x 1 cm and Lt. Side 1 x 1 cm. On opening underneath skin ecchymosed and clotted blood present.”

¶10

Cause of death was asphyxia due to ante-mortem throttling.

¶11

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the accused-applicant was living separately from her son. Even the complainant in his statement before the court said that the accused-applicant was living separately with her husband in a

¶12

separate house and the deceased was living separately with her husband in a different house. Accused-application has been in jail since 1.10.2021.

¶13

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶14

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the stand of the complainant, who is father of the deceased, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accusedapplicant on bail.

¶15

Let applicant Smt.Pushpa be released on bail in the above case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶17

(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 her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the

¶20

trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 her in accordance with law.

¶21

Order Date :- 30.5.2022 Rao/-

¶22

Digitally signed by CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO Date: 2022.05.30 18:52:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt.Pushpa v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Pushpa v. State of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko

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

Rama Nand Verma Vs State of U.P.

Ram Singh Vs State of U.P.and 3 Ors.

Dileep Kumar Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home Department, Government of U.P., Lucknow

Shivam Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Dept. of Home Secretariat Lucknow and Ors.

Ram Dhiraj Vs State of U.P.

Aman Vs State of U.P., through the Principle Sec. Home Dept Civil Secrt. Lucknow and 3 Others