Allowed

Meera Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 May 2022BAIL/14473/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil court granted bail to Meera Devi in a criminal case under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The court found a prima facie case for bail despite opposing counsel's objection, imposing specific conditions regarding court attendance and prohibition of abuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Meera Devi on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties in like amount, subject to strict conditions of court attendance and no adjournments.

Meera Devi Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14473 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Meera Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicant, Meera Devi, who is involved in Case Crime No. 220 of 2021, under Sections 498A and 304-B of I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Gangeeri, District- Aligarh.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is further contended that there is general role assigned to the applicant. Further he states that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and she may be released on bail as per the provisions of Section 437 of Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the applicant has no other criminal history and is in jail since 02.01.2022 and if she is released on bail, there is no chance of her absconding or misusing the liberty of bail or tampering with the prosecution witnesses. Learned counsel for the applicant to bolster his case, submitted that the applicant was not involved in the crime at all and has taken recourse to the statement made under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., of the first informant wherein he had stated that it was only the husband Tarun Kumar who was responsible for the incident and not his parents. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the charge-sheet had been submitted and the investigation was complete.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not deny the fact that the charge-sheet has been submitted by the Police.

¶9

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims, the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant, Meera Devi be released on bail in Case Crime No.220 of 2021, under Sections 498A and 304-B of I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Gangeeri, District- Aligarh on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the court.

¶12

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 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 of the Indian Panel Code.

¶14

(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 n such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case (ii) framing of charges and (iii) recording of statement under Section 323 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 an abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

Order Date :- 11.5.2022 vkj

¶17

Digitally signed by VIJAY KRISHNA JAISWAL Date: 2022.05.17 17:56:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Meera Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meera 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devendra Pratap and Others Vs Union of India and Others

Ghana Nand Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Others

Dr. Sweta Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sandeep Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Raheesh Vs State of U.P.

Anarkali and Another Vs State of U.P.