Allowed

Anara Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC24 Apr 2024/4493/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge allowed bail to Anara Devi, an elderly mother-in-law accused in a dowry-related murder case under Sections 498A and 304B IPC, holding her entitled to relief under Section 437 Cr.P.C. despite the victim's death, subject to stringent bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court, not seek adjournments, and comply with proclamation provisions.

Anara Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:31826

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4493 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Anara Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Atiya Abid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Atiya Abid, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anirudh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 26.9.2023 in Case Crime No. 26.9.2023 in Case Crime No.257 of 2023 u/s 498A, 304B IPC & section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Kunda, District Pratapgarh. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged.

¶8

Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein general allegations have been leveled agaisnt three accused persons including the present applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that at the time of 'Panchnama' the family members of both sides were present wherein the allegation of demand of dowry has been made. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that actually this is not the case of demand of dowry or torturing the victim inasmuch as the husband of the victim (since deceased) had seen her with one more person namely, Deepak, therefore, sudden fight started between him and Deepak where the husband of the victim (since deceased) had also sustained injuries. The victim (since deceased) i.e. daughter-in-law of the present applicant tried to pacify the dispute wherein she got injured and resultant thereof she died later on.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant who is mother-in-law of the victim (since deceased) was having cordial relation with her and she had never demanded any dowry from her or

¶10

her family members and never tortured her in the name of dowry. As a matter of fact she had nothing to do with the family affairs of her son and his wife besides the present applicant is an old aged lady therefore, she is entitled for the benefit of section 437 Cr.P.C.

¶11

The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the victim (since deceased) was having four antemortem injuries and since she died in the house of inlaws, therefore, the present applicant who is mother-inlaw can not escape from the responsibility.

¶13

Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that the applicant is mother-in-law of the victim (since deceased), she was having cordial relation with her and she had never demanded any dowry from her or her family members or never tortured her in the name of dowry. As a matter of fact she had nothing to do with the family affairs of her son and his wife besides the present applicant is an old aged lady, therefore, she is entitled for the benefit of section 437 Cr.P.C. and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶14

Let the applicant Anara Devi, involved in aforesaid case crime 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for

¶16

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.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

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

¶19

(iv) 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.

¶20

(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned.

¶21

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 24.4.2024 Om

¶23

Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anara Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anara Devi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Smt. Ramrati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.

Akash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Tushar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko

Phool Chand Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Manish Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Anubhav Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.