Allowed

Sushama v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2024/10059/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal bail application allowed for the mother-in-law of a deceased woman. The court held that due to unascertained cause of death and absence of injuries, no prima facie material exists to suggest physical or mental harassment related to dowry demand.

What did the court decide?

Stayed in bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 326 of 2024 under Sections 80, 85 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act on furnishing bonds and sureties.

Sushama Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:65616

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10059 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sushama Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

2 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was married to the son of the applicant in the year 2023 and it was a love marriage. Subsequently, it was stated that the demand of dowry was being made and ultimately, the daughter of the informant was killed on 10.07.2024. The post mortem record states that the cause of death could not be ascertained.

¶8

3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer.

¶9

4. Considering the fact that the cause of death could not be ascertained, and no injury was observed on the body of the deceased, prima facie, the material to suggest that the applicant had subjected the victim to physical or mental harassment in relation to the demand of dowry soon before her death is apparently missing, as such, the applicant who is mother in law, is enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶10

5. Let the applicant Sushama be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 326 of 2024, under Sections 80, 85 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Lalganj, District Raebareli, on her furnishing personal bonds and two reliable

¶11

sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶13

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶14

(c) 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

Order Date :- 21.9.2024 Arun

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sushama v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushama v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Radheshyam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Pappu Singh @ Randeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Rajesh Gond @ Rajesh Ramsunder Gond Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Bitul vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Panchayatiraj Lko and 2 Others

Madhubala Bhargava vs Sri Abhishek Kumar Tiwari

Sushama vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko