Allowed

Sharda Devi v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Allahabad HC21 Apr 2022BAIL/3865/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to Sharda Devi in a trial regarding dowry harassment and criminal negligence causing death. The court observed that no specific allegations were made against her compared to co-accused and allowed her release on personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Sharda Devi Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3865 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sharda Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Manohar Kashyap

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Mithilesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the accused-applicant, Shri Ram Manohar Kashyap, learned counsel for the complainant/informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Sharda Devi for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 349 of 2021, under Sections 304-B, 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kasimabad, District Ghazipur, during trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication and the applicant has been involved in this case only on account of her relation with the deceased as she is mother-in-law of the deceased.

¶8

It is further submitted that general allegation of demand of dowry and committing cruelty in lieu thereof, soon before the death of the deceased, have been alleged against all the accused persons named in the F.I.R., however, no specific allegation and overact has been assigned to the instant applicant.

¶9

It is further submitted that by any stretch of imagination the applicant could not be the beneficiary of dowry which was being allegedly demanded from the deceased. It is next submitted that identically placed co-accused person namely Jeewat Bandhan (husband of the applicant/'Sasur') has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 21.03.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 3934 of 2022. Applicant is in jail in this case since 26.10.2021 and she is not having any criminal history and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail she may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed

¶11

heinous offence and, therefore, she is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the informant/complainant also opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that she has instrumental in harassing the deceased and also of demanding dowry and, therefore, keeping in view her role in the alleged commission of the crime, she is not entitled to be released on bail, but could not controvert the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant that identically placed co-accused person namely Jeewat Bandhan (husband of the applicant/'Sasur') has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶13

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that general allegations of demand of dowry and committing cruelty in lieu thereof has been levelled against all the accused persons named in the first information report, however, no specific allegation of any kind has been levelled against the applicant. The role of the applicant in the alleged crime is at par with Jeewat Bandhan, who has already been granted the facility of bail. It is vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that it is the husband of the deceased which may be held more responsible for the incident which had occurred. The death of the deceased is stated to have occurred by hanging as in the postmortem report, it has been opined that the death of the deceased has been caused due to 'asphyxia', as a result of antemortem hanging. Applicant is in jail in this case since 26.10.2021 without any criminal antecedents and the presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶14

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 .

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without

¶18

seeking any adjournment.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 21.4.2022 Praveen

¶24

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 2022.04.21 14:15:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sharda Devi v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharda Devi v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandra Pal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lalta Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Harpyari Vs State of U.P.

Shamshad Vs State of U.P.