Allowed

Smt. Shanti v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Jun 2023BAIL/26813/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AFC. 48 order granting bail to Smt. Shanti, a 70-year-old applicant accused of dowry death (Sections 498A, 304B IPC). Court noted she lived separately, aided investigation, and has no criminal history. Bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding evidence tampering and witness interference.

Smt. Shanti Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:128260

¶2

Court No. - 48

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26813 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Shanti Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Karan Nath Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. on behalf of the state and perused the record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Smt. Shanti, with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 203 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Chandausi, District Sambhal, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

As per prosecution case, in brief, the applicant and her family members demanded dowry from the victim's family but due to non-fulfillment of the said demand, they have killed the victim by giving her intoxicated substance.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is mother-in-law of the victim aged about 70 years and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that marriage of applicant's son and victim was solemnized two years ago in accordance with Hindu Rites and Rituals, and at the time of marriage no demand of dowry was made. He further submits that applicant's son Ratnesh and victim were living separately. He next submits that charge sheet has already been filed in the matter. He further submits that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant and she is languishing in jail since 25.04.2023. If the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submits that allegations are serious in nature, and applicant is mother-in-law of the victim. He further submits that the offence is serious; therefore, the accused-applicant deserves no leniency at this stage.

¶11

Be that as it may, having heard the learned counsel for the parties, and after perusal of the record, it transpires that

¶12

applicant is mother-in-law, aged about 70 years, and she was living separately with her other son at the time of incident. He next submits that charge sheet has already been filed in the matter. He further submits that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant, and she is languishing in jail since 25.04.2023, and cooperated with the investigating officer during the investigation; it will take a sufficiently long time to conclude the trial, and no purpose would be served in keeping the accused-applicant in jail during pendency of the trial. Considering the facts above, this court is inclined to enlarge the accused applicant on bail. Therefore, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant, Smt. Shanti , be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the court's satisfaction, subject to the following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

7.1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and shall cooperate with the police as required.

¶15

7.2. The applicant shall refrain from pressurizing the witnesses during the trial.

¶16

7.3. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the same shall be grounds for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Observations made by this court while deciding the present bail application are prima facie in nature and shall have no bearing on the trial of the case.

¶19

Order Date :- 23.6.2023 Ujjawal

¶20

Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL PARJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Shanti v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shanti 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

Farzan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ajay Kumar Gupta @ Babloo Vs State of U.P.

Chandni Bano and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Jagdish Vs State of U.P.

Love @ Aditya Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Aman Nishad Vs State of U.P.