Allowed

Smt. Kinchu Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2023/755/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the applicant, Smt. Kinchu Tiwari, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased in a dowry-related murder case. The court dismissed the court's observation that the case involves Section 498-A and 302 IPC. The court noted the applicant lives separately, the demanded dowry was not applicable to her, and granted bail on personal bond with stringent conditions to ensure trial a

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions to appear for framing of charges and recording of statements.

Smt. Kinchu Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 755 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Kinchu Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Smt. Nalini Prakash Jain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Smt. Nalini Prakash Jain, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present applicant is in jail since 22.02.2022 in Case Crime No. 29 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Dhanepur, District Gonda. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has falsely been implicated as she has not committed any offence as alleged.

¶7

Attention has been drawn by the learned counsel for the applicant towards the impugned FIR wherein the general allegation of demand of dowry and cruelty has been levelled against all the family members including the present applicant. The present applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. Learned counsel has stated that the present applicant alongwith her husband is living separately and not with her son or deceased. The applicant resides at village Rani Jot, Pargana, Tehsil and District Gonda. Recital to this effect has been given in para 13 to the bail application, however the applicant's son and daughter-in-law were living in a separate house in another village i.e. Budhsagar Purwa, Police Station Dhanepur, District Gonda.

¶8

Attention has been drawn towards the statement of PW1(informant/complainant) whereby he has stated that his daughter died in the place of her husband, namely, Badelal. The applicant-Smt. Kinchu Tiwari, mother-in-law, was living in another house. The complainant has further stated that the item of dowry demanded was bullet Motorcycle so that the work of contractor could be done properly.

¶9

Mrs. Jain has stated that the present applicant who is mother-inlaw may not use the bullet motorcycle as the same may be used by her son. Her son is still in jail. Cause of death is throttling and the victim has sustained six antemortem injuries. Learned counsel has explained this fact to say that she was absolutely not aware about the fact as to how the victim has sustained

¶10

those injuries as she was not present in the house when such incident had taken place, since she was living at another place. Learned counsel further submits that if the present applicant is released on bail, she shall cooperate in the trial and shall not misuse the liberty granted by this Court and shall abide all the terms and conditions of the bail order.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer and submitted that the victim died within one year of marriage in a mysterious circumstances having six antemortem injuries, therefore the bail application of the applicant may be rejected.

¶12

Without entering into the merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the FIR, the fact that the applicant is living separately in another village, the victim died in the house of her husband, the item demanded in the name of dowry is bullet motorcycle which is of no use to the applicant and the undertaking that she shall cooperate in the trial proceeding, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶13

Let the applicant Smt. Kinchu Tiwari , involved in aforesaid case crime number 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

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

¶15

(ii) 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(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. 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii)

¶18

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 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.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned.

¶20

Before parting with it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures as per law if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial properly. The learned trial court shall fix short dates to ensure that trial is concluded at the earliest.

¶21

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶22

Order Date :- 18.1.2023 kkv/

¶23

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Smt. Kinchu Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kinchu Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Monu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ashok Kumar Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko.

Ram Raj Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Nawab Singh Vs State Thur. C.B.I.

Nawab Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. C.B.I

Vimla Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home