Dismissed

Smt. Mamta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Aug 2023BAIL/25095/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court rejected a criminal bail application filed by Smt. Mamta in a murder case involving dowry allegations. The Court found the applicant not entitled to bail based on the deceased's dying declaration, but directed the trial court to conclude the trial within eight months due to the applicant's prolonged detention.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial court directed to conclude trial within eight months.

Smt. Mamta Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155753

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25095 of 2020

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Mamta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Tripathi,Naushad Alam,Shashi Kant Dwivedi,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shashi Kant Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 463 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 304B, 302 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Chhibramau, District Kannauj during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and others including husband of the deceased and according to the FIR marriage of the deceased was performed with the brother-in-law (Devar) of the applicant on 23.04.2016 and after marriage applicant and other family members tortured her for golden chain and a buffalo and on 27.06.2019 applicant and other family members committed the murder of the deceased by ablazing her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is Jethani of the deceased and totally on the basis of false allegation of demand of dowry, she has been implicated in the present matter. He further submits that actually deceased committed suicide and subsequently in dying declaration she made false allegation against applicant, her husband and her son that they ablazed her. He further submits that in the dying declaration there was no allegation of any demand of dowry, therefore, it appears that totally on the basis of false allegation applicant has been roped in the present matter. He further submits that applicant is a lady and she is in jail since 28.08.2019 i.e. for almost four years.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is Jethani of the deceased and deceased in her dying declaration categorically stated that applicant and her

¶11

husband Manoj caught hold her and thereafter son of the applicant ablazed her, therefore, applicant does not deserve bail.

¶12

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶13

Although, applicant is lady and Jethani of the deceased and she is in jail since 28.08.2019 i.e. for almost four years but on the record there is dying declaration of the deceased which shows that applicant along with her husband Manoj caught hold her and thereafter her son Ankit ablazed the deceased, therefore, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.

¶15

However, considering the fact that applicant in the present matter is in jail for almost four years, trial court is directed to concluded the trial of the case within eight months from the date of production of certified copy of this order strictly as per provision of Section 309 Cr.P.C., if there is no legal impediment.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶17

Order Date :- 3.8.2023 AK Pandey

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Mamta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Mamta 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

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Aman Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babloo Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rishipal Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Lavkush Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandra Mani @ Dablu @ Mahraj Pandey Vs State of U.P.