Allowed

Satyabhama and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2023BAIL/35684/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicants, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased, charged under Sections 306, 201 and 498-A IPC. Finding no evidence of abetment by them and noting a co-accused was at liberty, the court allowed the application subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants Satyabhama Shukla and Paramhans Shukla released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each.

Satyabhama and Another Vs State of U.P. — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35684 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Satyabhama And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amarjeet Yadav,A Kumar Srivastava,Yogesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State.

¶6

The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 197 of 2022, under Sections 306, 201 and 498-A I.P.C., Police Station-Raunapar, District-Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

As per the prosecution case in brief, informant who is brother of Priya Shukla (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') has lodged an FIR on 08.06.2022 for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 498-A IPC against Deepak Shukla, Smt. Satyabhama (applicant no. 1), Paramhans Shukla (applicant no. 2), Rohit Shukla and Sonu Shukla with the allegation inter-alia that the marriage of his sister was solemnized on 24.06.2014 with co-accused Deepak Shukla and from their wedlock, two daughters were born. Deepak Shukla used to live in Saudi Arab. After the marriage, the accused persons started harassing and torturing his sister regarding which his sister had made a complaint raising suspicion that she can be poisoned to death by her in-laws. On 06.06.2022, dead body of a woman was found lying near the river which was later on identified as the body of his sister.

¶8

The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicants is that as per post-mortem report of the deceased, cause of death was not ascertained hence viscera was preserved. In viscera report, no poison has been found. After culmination of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted

¶9

under Sections 306, 201 and 498-A IPC against the applicants whereas there is no material evidence with regard to abetment or instigation of suicide on the part of the applicants. He next submits that in fact deceased died due to snake bite. Much emphasis has been given by contending that no specific role has been attributed to the present applicants who are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased and their case is distinguishable from the case of husband of the deceased. It is also pointed out that co-accused Rohit Shukla has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.04.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40997 of 2022, therefore, applicants are also entitled to be released on bail who are languishing in jail since 04.07.2022.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicants but could not dispute the aforesaid factum of the case as argued on behalf of the applicants.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that the applicants are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased. Charge-sheet has been submitted against them under Sections 306, 201 and 498-A IPC. There is no evidence of abetment of suicide against the applicants. I also find that co-accused Rohit Shukla has been granted bail, as noted above, therefore, applicants have made out prima-facie case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶12

Let the applicants- Satyabhama Shukla and Paramhans Shukla , 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 concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

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

¶14

(ii) That the applicants 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.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 5.4.2023 Saurabh

¶19

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

Satyabhama and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyabhama and Another 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

Abhishek Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Phool Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shilu @ Shailendra Kumar Pathak Vs State of U.P.

Bablu Rajbhar @ Bablu Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Narendra Pasi Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Vs State of U.P.