Munni Devi Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:119410

Court No. - 75

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20505 of 2023

Applicant :- Munni Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Gupta

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

1- Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant.

¶7

2- The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 82 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police StationHighway, District-Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

3- As per the prosecution case in brief, the informant who is father of Roshni (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') lodged F.I.R. on 25.01.2023, against Kanhaiya, Premchandra, Dharmvir and present applicant-Munni Devi, who are husband, brother-in-law( Jeth ), father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased with the allegations inter-alia that marriage of his daughter was solemnized on 21.11.2021 with co-accused Kanhaiya, but after some days of marriage, accused persons started harassing his daughter and there was consistent demand of motorcycle and gold chain. On 22.01.2023, on account of nonfulfillment of their demand, his daughter was done to death.

¶9

4- It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and general allegation of the demand of dowry has been levelled against all the accused persons. No specific role has been attributed against the applicant. As per the postmortem report of the deceased, cause of her death is hanging and except the ligature mark around her neck, no

¶10

other injury has been found on her body. The applicant has no concern with the matrimonial affairs of the deceased with her husbandKanhaiya. He next submitted that the co-accused Dharmvir, who is husband of the applicant and father-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.05.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 20227 of 2023. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.03.2023 having no criminal history to his credit and in case she is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

¶11

5- Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the deceased died unnatural death within seven years of her marriage, therefore, bail application of the applicant is not liable to be allowed.

¶12

6- Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that though there is presumption under Section 113-B of the Evidence Act, but the parameter for granting or rejecting the bail application and conviction or acquittal of the accused after leading the evidence before the trial Court are entirely different. The cause of death of the deceased is hanging and identically situated co-accused Dharmvir has been granted bail as noted above, therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail on the ground of parity. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶13

7- Let the applicant- Munni Devi , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court

¶14

concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶16

(ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iii) That after her release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶18

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

¶19

8- In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶20

9- It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial.

¶21

Order Date :- 29.5.2023 Kashifa

¶22

Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Munni Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munni Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sagum Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mukendra Nishad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rohit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Subhash@ Subhash Yadav Vs State of U.P.