Allowed

Smt. Nisso v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Nov 2022BAIL/35133/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant, a mother-in-law charged under dowry-related provisions and 304-B IPC. The application was allowed based on the facts presented without adversely commenting on merits, subject to specific undertakings and bonds.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions including undertaking not to seek adjournments and appearing in court.

Smt. Nisso Vs State of U.P. — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35133 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Nisso Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari,Avanish Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 110 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304-B IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kurara, District Hamirpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there was no disputed of demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the deceased. There is general allegation against the applicant. The applicant has no motive to commit the alleged offence. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. In postmortem report the cause of death of the deceased has been shown asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. He has further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 21.4.2022.

¶8

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Smt. Nisso, who is involved in aforementioned case 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she

¶12

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.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶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., 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶15

(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 her in accordance with law.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 9.11.2022

¶20

¶21

Digitally signed by AFAQ AHMAD Date: 2022.11.09 13:31:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Nisso v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nisso 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

Arif Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pawan Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rani Devi Vs State of U.P Thru, Secretary(Home) at Lko

Shailesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Surjeet Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kumar @ Jagdish Kumar Vs State of U.P.