Smt Muliya Vs State of U.P.

Court No. - 79

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7291 of 2023

Applicant :- Smt Muliya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kishor Gupta,Shiv Shankar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard Shri Ram Kishor Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Dharmendra Kumar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.447 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Maudaha, District Hamirpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the marriage of son of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu rites on 29.5.2020 and the accused persons are stated to have subjected her to cruelty after the deceased had given birth to a female child. Later on the deceased is stated to have sustained burn injuries within the precincts of house of the applicant on 2.10.2022 whereby she succumbed to said injuries sustained in the hospital.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She has nothing to do with the said offence. There is no demand of dowry as stated in the FIR. The ingredients of Sections 498-A and 304-B I.P.C. are not fulfilled as such the applicant is entitled for bail. There are general allegations in the FIR and no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant. The applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased person. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.11.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of

¶10

bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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.

¶13

Let the applicant- Smt Muliya involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected of the commission of which she is suspected.

¶18

(v) 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 13.3.2023 Vikas

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt Muliya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Muliya v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Parvesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Piyush @ Tusa Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Vs State of U.P.

Chhottan Tiwari Urf Muratdhwaj Vs State of U.P.

Yatendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jaiveer Singh Vs State of U.P.