Allowed

Vidya Rani Thru. Next Friend Ved Prakash v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2024NABAIL/76/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS, the Allahabad High Court granted liberty to the applicant, an ailing mother-in-law falsely implicated in a dowry-related poisoning case, during investigation and filing of police report subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant entitled to anticipatory bail till completion of investigation and filing of police report upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties with specified conditions.

Vidya Rani Thru. Next Friend Ved Prakash vs State of U.P… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:72633

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 76 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vidya Rani Thru. Next Friend Ved Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd.Yusuf Ansari,Rushida Farheen

¶6

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶7

Sri Brijesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit of the applicant and Mohd. Yusuf Ansari, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 3 has filed counter affidavit. The same are taken on record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is apprehending her arrest in Case Crime No. 0322 of 2024, under Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police StationBheera, District- Kheri.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant who is mother-in-law of the victim (since deceased) has been falsely implicated in the present case as she has not committed any offence as alleged and she had nothing to do with the family affairs of her son as they were living separately. It is further stated that her relations with her daughter in law were cordial and she never demanded any dowry from the victim (since deceased) or her family members.

¶10

As per prosecution story, this is a case of poisoning and cause of death could not be ascertained so the viscera has been preserved.

¶11

Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No. 8 which is the medical papers relating to the applicant issued from SGPGIMS, Lucknow showing that she is having neurological problem since 2019 and her treatment is going on at SGPGIMS, Lucknow. It has been informed that the present applicant had suffered one paralytic attack.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having her permanent residence and there is no flight risk and the applicant undertakes that she shall co-operate in the investigation proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if so granted by this Court.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the aforesaid prayer for bail and has

¶14

submitted that all the family members were torturing the victim (since deceased) and the applicant no. 1 and 3 were demanding dowry from the victim (since deceased) and her family members.

¶15

Therefore, without entering into the merits of the issue and considering the fact that the present applicant is an ailing person and her treatment is going on at SGPGIMS, Lucknow since 2019; she had suffered from one paralytic attack in past; she is a lady; the undertaking that she shall co-operate in the investigation; she shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, I find it appropriate that liberty of the applicant may be protected till completion of investigation and filing of police report in the light of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Shushila Aggrawal And Others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) And Another 2005 SCC 1.

¶16

It is further directed that in the event of arrest, applicantVidya Rani Thru. Next Friend Ved Prakash, shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number till completion of the investigation and filing of police report on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court/court concerned/arresting authority with the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) that the applicant shall appear before the investigating officer and trial court on each date fixed unless her personal presence is exempted;

¶18

(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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶19

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

¶20

(iv) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence during trial;

¶21

(v) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶22

(vi) that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the learned counsel for the State shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶23

This anticipatory bail application is disposed of in view of the above terms.

¶24

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

¶25

Order Date :- 24.10.2024/(Manoj K.)

¶26

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

Vidya Rani Thru. Next Friend Ved Prakash v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vidya Rani Thru. Next Friend Ved Prakash v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Maruf Anwar Hashmi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Affairs Sectt. Lko.

Anju vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Basic Education) Deptt. Basic Education Lko. and 4 Others

Manoj Kumar Rai vs C.B.I. Thru. Superintendent of Police A.C.B. Lko.

Budhi Sagar Shukla and 12 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Finance Lko and 2 Others

Vishwa Nath Dixit and 32 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. Deptt. Finance Lko. and 2 Others

Ravi Shukla @ Guddan Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.