Allowed

Rambha Devi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Aug 2023BAIL/36667/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for alleged abetting of suicide, the High Court granted bail citing overcrowding, uncertainty in the trial, and the mandate of Article 21, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties on conditions not to tamper with evidence or seek adjournments when witnesses are present.

Rambha Devi Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:168262

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36667 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rambha Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Bali Ram,Abhishek Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ram Bali Ram, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Kalim, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicant of abetting suicide of her sister-in-law (Devrani).

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication. The marriage of the couple took place in the year 2003. They used to fight and quarrel amongst themselves and therefore, deceased committed suicide by way of hanging. Applicant has been falsely implicated on the ground that she had illicit relationship with the husband of the deceased, who is brother-inlaw of the applicant (Dewar). The applicant is aged about 52 years and has grown-up children. The deceased took 20 years to time to discover the same. She is in jail since 29.06.2023.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Rambha Devi, involved in Case Crime No.76 of 2023, under Section 306 I.P.C, Police Station Birno, District- Ghazipur 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek

¶13

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.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) 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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶18

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted

¶19

Order Date :- 22.8.2023 SS

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rambha Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambha Devi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay @ Surendra Vs State of U.P.

Ram Kishor Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Heera Lal Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Shiva @ Nirdesh Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bheemrana Vs State of U.P.

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