Allowed

Binda Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2022BAIL/1768/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC and Dowry Death Act. The applicant, alleged to be the mother-in-law, was not named in the initial FIR but added later. With no specific overt acts attributed and coordinate benches granting bail to similar co-accused, bail was granted subject to conditions to secure presence for trial.

What did the court decide?

Accused Binda Devi released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions to ensure appearance and prevent tampering with witnesses.

Binda Devi Vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1768 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Binda Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kaushlendra Singh,Karunesh Pratap Singh

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Karunesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Binda Devi for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 220 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur, during trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R., however, in the statement of the informant and other witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., for the very first time name of the applicant has been mentioned on the pretext that due to inadvertent mistake in the first information report, the name of Kailashi Devi was written in place of the name of instant applicant.

¶10

It is further submitted that in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement of the witnesses general allegations of demand of dowry and committing cruelty in lieu thereof has been levelled and no specific over act has been assigned to the instant applicant, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased.

¶11

It is further submitted that the death of the deceased had occurred due to 'asphyxia' as a result of antemortem injuries, however, neither in the first information report nor in the statement of the prosecution witnesses it has been alleged that how the instant applicant could be the beneficiary of dowry, which was being allegedly demanded from the deceased.

¶12

It is next submitted that brother-in-law of the deceased namely

¶13

Rajan Singh as well as paternal uncle of the husband of the deceased namely Surya Pratap @ Pratap Singh, whose role has been shown identical to the role of the instant applicant have been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court, vide order dated 08.03.2022 and 14.02.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos. 44740 of 2021 and 43992 of 2021.

¶14

It is also submitted that applicant is in jail in this case since 17.07.2021 and charge-sheet in this case has already been filed. There is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicant being the mother-in-law of the deceased is more responsible than the other co-accused persons and, therefore, keeping in view the heinousness of the offence, she is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the applicant is mother-inlaw of the deceased and allegation of demand of dowry and committing cruelty in lieu thereof have been levelled in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement of the witnesses, however, no over act or specific role has been attributed to the instant applicant. Similarly placed co-accused persons have been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court. Applicant is in jail in this case since 17.07.2021 and charge-sheet in this case has also been filed. The presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶17

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed .

¶18

Let the accused/applicant- Binda Devi involved in abovementioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶19

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶21

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶22

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

¶23

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶24

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.

¶25

Order Date :- 5.4.2022

¶26

Praveen

¶27

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 2022.04.05 17:56:41 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Binda Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binda 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

Hareram Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Vs State of U.P.

Satyabhama Singh Vs State of U.P.

Shamsher Ali Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sandeep and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another