Allowed

Smt Akhtariya@ Mumtaj Jahan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2022BAIL/51190/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant, a sister-in-law of the deceased, charged under Sections 498-A IPC and 304-B IPC. A prima facie case for bail was made out due to her living separately and lack of involvement in the deceased's death.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and complying with specific court-attendance conditions.

Smt Akhtariya@ Mumtaj Jahan Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51190 of 2022 Applicant :- Smt Akhtariya@ Mumtaj Jahan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Monis Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶3

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

¶4

Applicant- Smt Akhtariya@ Mumtaj Jahan seeks bail in Case Crime No. 146 of 2022, under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Shahi, District- Bareilly.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is sister-in-law of the deceased and her Devar was married to the victim on 9.11.2019.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant was living separately and has no concern whatsoever with the day-today affairs of husband and wife and she had never demanded any additional dowry from her nor ever tortured her, maltreated her or subjected her to cruelty for non-fulfilment of demand of additional dowry. However, false report has been lodged against her alongwith eight other family members levelling false allegation of demand of additional dowry against them.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the post mortem report of the deceased wherein the doctor has noted the cause of death to be asphyxia as a result of hanging. Except ligature mark, there is no other injury on the person of the deceased.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that on account of her relation being sister-in-law of the deceased she has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior

¶10

motive.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant is a lady and is in jail since 18.8.2022 and has no criminal history to her credit. The charge sheet has already been submitted. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the evidence as such prima facie a case for bail is made out.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶13

Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of record, it is evident that the applicant is sister-in-law of the deceased and her Devar was married to the victim on 9.11.2019. The applicant was living separately and has no concern whatsoever with the day-today affairs of husband and wife and she had never demanded any additional dowry from her nor ever tortured her, maltreated her or subjected her to cruelty for nonfulfilment of demand of additional dowry. A false report has been lodged against her alongwith eight other family members levelling false allegation of demand of additional dowry against them. In the post mortem report, the doctor has noted the cause of death to be asphyxia as a result of hanging. Except ligature mark, there is no other injury on the person of the deceased. The applicant is a lady and is in jail since 18.8.2022 and has no criminal history to her credit. The charge sheet has already been submitted. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the evidence. In the backdrop of the said facts and circumstances prima facie a case for bail is made out.

¶14

Let applicant- Smt Akhtariya@ Mumtaj Jahan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-

¶15

(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the

¶16

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

(2). 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC.

¶18

(3). 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 IPC.

¶19

(4). The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the 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 sufÏcient 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.

¶20

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶21

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶23

The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶24

Order Date :- 8.12.2022 R

¶25

Digitally signed by RAM ASARE MORYA Date: 2022.12.09 11:15:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Akhtariya@ Mumtaj Jahan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Akhtariya@ Mumtaj Jahan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nishar Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sushil Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vinesh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Guddoo Vs State of U.P.

Sane Alam Vs State of U.P.