Allowed

Smt Dropati v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2022BAIL/53802/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant, who was the mother-in-law of a deceased woman. The court noted the lack of specific allegations of dowry harassment against her and the victim's suicide indicated by the post-mortem report approving release on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount subject to conditions regarding cooperation, no tampering, and no illegal activities.

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

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53802 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Dropati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Dhar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 792 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Shajhahanpur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Her son was married to the deceased about three years back.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that after the marriage, she had never made any demand of additional dowry either from the deceased or her family members nor ever tortured her, maltreated her or subjected her to cruelty for the non-fulfillment of the same. On the basis of general and vague allegation of demand of additional dowry, instant FIR has been lodged against as many as ten family members including the applicant. There is no specific allegation against the applicant.

¶9

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

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that victim in fact committed suicide by hanging herself and the applicant has absolutely no role to play in the said incident and only on account of being the mother-in-law of the deceased, she has been nominated as an accused in the present case.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is a lady and is in jail since 27.09.2022 and

¶12

has no criminal history to her credit. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses, as such, she may be released on bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased and except general and vague allegation, no specific allegation has been made against the applicant. The applicant is a lady and is in jail since 27.09.2022 and has no criminal history to her credit.

¶13

Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it is evident that applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased and her son was married to the deceased about three years back. General and vague allegation of demand of additional dowry has been made against her and there is no specific allegation to show that the applicant tortured her, maltreated her or subjected her to cruelty for the non-fulfillment of demand of additional dowry. There is no specific evidence to show that the applicant, in any manner, is responsible for causing death of her daughter-in-law.

¶14

Furthermore, as per the post-mortem report, the Doctor has noted the cause of death to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging and except a ligature mark, there is no injury on the person of the deceased. The applicant is a lady and is in jail since 27.09.2022 and has no criminal history to her credit. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Let the applicant Smt. Dropati be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶16

The applicant shall continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶17

The applicant shall not tamper with the witnesses.

¶18

The applicant shall not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶19

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

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail. The bail application is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 28.11.2022 Nadim

¶21

Digitally signed by NADIM ALAM Date: 2022.11.28 14:43:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Dropati v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Dropati 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

Smt. Neelam Vs State of U.P.

Hariom Goswami Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Renu Devi Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Kumar @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Smt Munni Devi Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Singh Vs State of U.P.