Allowed

Rukmini v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Mar 2024BAIL/2564/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a second bail application filed by the accused in a Section 306 I.P.C. case involving suicide. Considering no prior criminal history and co-accused already released, the court granted bail on personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

Rukmini vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30910

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2564 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rukmini Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Anand Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

¶8

This is the second application seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 504 of 2021, under Section 306 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Beekapur, District Ayodhya. The first bail application bearing Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.9831 of 2022 was rejected by this court by means of an order dated 17.05.2023.

¶9

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of a First Information Report (F.I.R.) lodged on 29.09.2021 against nine named accused persons, including the applicant, stating that the informant has got his sister married to the applicant's son- Ram Kumar in the year 2007. Family members of his sister's husband used to harass her. Her husband used to live at Pratapgarh in connection with his service. On 28.09.2021 all the named accused persons were abusing and ill-treating the informant's sister and being aggrieved with the same, she consumed some poisonous substance and died during treatment in the hospital.

¶10

A copy of the suicide-note written by the deceased has been annexed with the affidavit filed in support of the bailapplication, wherein she has stated that the accused persons continuously harassed her since soon after her marriage. Regarding the applicant, it is specifically stated that she used to hurl dirty abuses and beat the deceased, which were tolerated by her, but when the applicant wanted her to commit the misdeed, she could not do it and committed suicide.

¶11

The suicide note was sent for hand writing expert's opinion to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the Forensic Science Laboratory has submitted a report that the sample hand writing of the deceased does not contain enough common words and therefore no expert's opinion could be given regarding hand writing in which the suicide note was written. Although, the F.I.R. was lodged against nine persons named in the suicide note the charge sheet was submitted only against three personsthe applicant, her husband and son.

¶12

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, she has been falsely implicated in the present case and she has no criminal history. Both the other charge sheeted co-accused persons Ram Teerath and Raj Kumar have already been granted bail by this court by means of orders dated 09.01.2024 and 13.02.2024, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.10435 of 2023 and 1302 of 2024 respectively.

¶13

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶14

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history and she is languishing in jail since

¶15

01.04.2022 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶16

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant-Rukmini be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶19

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶20

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶21

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 19.4.2024 Ram.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rukmini v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rukmini v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ramjan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Abdul Raees Alias Danish Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Master Xxx Thru. His Father Y Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and 3 Others

Sangam Kumar Verma @ Sangam Verma Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Avinash Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another