Allowed

Rukhsana Khanam v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2024ABAIL/6970/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by Rukhsana Khanam, a mother-in-law accused under sections 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, upon finding her case similar to her husband's which had been admitted by the court, while avoiding opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on anticipatory bail pending trial upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties and complying with specified conditions.

Rukhsana Khanam vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:115371

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6970 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rukhsana Khanam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Babul Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State, apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off.

¶7

Heard Sri B.K.Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr. S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State.

¶8

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.0030 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 323,504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Jhansi during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is the mother-in-law of the victim and on the basis of false allegation applicant has been made accused in the present matter along with other accused persons including father-in-law,Inayat Ullah Khan.

¶10

He further submits that after considering entire facts of the case anticipatory bail application of father-in-law, i.e., co-accused Inayat Ullah Khan has been allowed by this Court vide order dated 9.1.2024 passed in Criminal Misc.Anticipatory Bail Application No. 9838 of 2023. He next submits that the case of applicant is at

¶11

par with him.

¶12

He further submits that during investigation applicant was not arrested and applicant is having apprehension if she will appear before the court concerned then she will be sent to jail.

¶13

He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

Considering the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that applicant is mother-in-law of the victim and the anticipatory bail application of the father-in-law of the victim has already been allowed by this Court on merit, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial.

¶17

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed.

¶18

In the event of arrest of the applicant -Rukhsana Khanam involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial case on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court concerned with the conditions:-

¶19

(i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶20

(ii) that 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.

¶21

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶22

(iv) that the applicant shall not temper with the evidence during the trial;

¶23

(v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶24

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶25

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶26

It is made clear that the observations made in granting anticipatory 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.

¶27

Order Date :- 19.7.2024

¶28

SKM

¶29

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rukhsana Khanam v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rukhsana Khanam v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Similar cases

Manish Kumar Verma @ Uday vs State of U.P. and Another

Santram vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Ashish Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shobhit Singh Alias Shiv Kumar Singh and 3 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others

Munazir Husain vs State of Up and Another

Pramod @ Kallu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others