The single judge granted bail to the applicant, a 65-year-old applicant accused of instigating her daughter-in-law to suicide under sections 306 and 498A IPC, citing overcrowding and uncertainty of trial conclusion.
Applicant released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions of appearance and no tampering with evidence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 58163 of 2022
Applicant :- Mahrun Nisha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ghazala Bano Quadri,Maseeh Uddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. There is allegation against her of harassing his daughter-in-law which may compel her to commit suicide. In the suicide notice there is no allegation against her.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim has committed suicide because of mis-adjustment in her matrimonial home. Applicant is 65 years old woman has been falsely implicated in this case. She is in jail since 02.12.2022. The husband of the deceased has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 10.12.2021 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.47151 of 2021.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
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.
Let the applicant, Mahrun Nisha, involved in Case Crime No.207 of 2021, under Sections 306, 498A I.P.C and 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station Ghoorpur, District- Prayagraj be released on bail on his 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.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek 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.
(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 him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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.
(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 him in accordance with law.
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.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 30.1.2023 SS
Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant mother-in-law entitled to bail in a case alleging instigation of daughter-in-law to commit suicide under sections 306 IPC and 498A IPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I.Referred¶9
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
6 provisions across 3 enactments
Mahrun Nisha
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
