Allowed

Smt. Gena Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC29 Aug 2023BAIL/58020/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to Smt. Gena Devi in a criminal case involving Section 498-A and 304-B IPC charges. The applicant, who is the deceased's mother-in-law, was granted bail till the trial's conclusion, subject to personal bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed till the end of trial on fulfillment of personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties.

Smt. Gena Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:174999

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58020 of 2019

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Gena Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Ram (Rawat),Indra Deo Mishra,Vinod Pandit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the material available on record.

¶7

This application for anticipatory bail has been filed by applicant - Smt. Gena Devi in connection with Case Crime No.126 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Padari, District Mirzapur.

¶8

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. It is further submitted that the dead body of the deceased was found on the railway track and the ante-mortem injuries found on the body of the deceased, as shown in the autopsy report, clearly show that the deceased was crushed by a train. No one has seen the applicant along with other co-accused persons carrying the dead body of the deceased to the railway track, as reveals from the evidence collected during course of investigation. It is further submitted that the dead body of the deceased was not found in the house of the applicant, but on a railway track. It is further submitted that the applicant had been granted interim anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 3.1.2020 and the same has not been misused by the applicant. It is further submitted that now the charge-sheet has been submitted in this matter and no custodial interrogation is required. It is further submitted that the co-accused Shivfal, the husband of the deceased, and Ram Narayan, the father-in-law of the deceased, have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 26.2.2020 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.8706 of 2020 and order dated 18.6.2020 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.48676 of 2019 respectively. It is further submitted that after submission of the charge-sheet, the present applicant is

¶9

cooperating with the trial court.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶11

In this matter, charge-sheet has been submitted. During course of investigation, the applicant had been granted interim anticipatory bail and the said liberty was not misused by her. It has been brought to the knowledge of the Court that she is cooperating with the trial court in the trial of the case.

¶12

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has settled the controversy finally by holding the anticipatory bail need not be of limited duration invariably. In appropriate case, it can continue upto conclusion of trial.

¶13

It has been further held therein that anticipatory bail granted can, depending on the conduct and behavior of the accused, continue after filing of the charge sheet till end of trial.

¶14

It has been further held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶15

It is also pointed out that in Sushila Aggarwal case (supra), if charge-sheet has been filed in a criminal matter, it does not necessarily mean that since arrest may be made in the particular manner, it must be made. What a Court has to see whether custodial interrogation is now required or not. In the present case, charge-sheet has been submitted and now in this case custodial interrogation is not required from the present applicant.

¶16

Hence, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for

¶17

anticipatory bail to the applicant till end of the trial in the matter.

¶18

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶19

In the event of arrest of the applicant in the aforesaid case crime, she shall be released on anticipatory bail till end of the trial on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall make herself available before the court concerned on the date fixed in the matter;

¶21

(ii) 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 / her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if she has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

¶23

In case of default of any of the conditions, same may be a ground for cancellation of protection granted to the applicant.

¶24

Order Date :- 29.8.2023 ss

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Gena Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Gena Devi v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Garg Jewelers through Its Proprietor Sri Bhupendra Garg vs State of U.P.and Another

Satyapal Singh Deshwal Vs State of U.P.

Akhilesh Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Naushad and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bachchoo and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kanhaiya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others