Sunita Devi vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39113 of 2025

Sunita Devi

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Shailesh Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 66

¶6

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶7

List revised.

¶8

Heard Sri Shailesh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶9

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Sunita Devi, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 194 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Adalhat, DistrictMirzapur.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the motherin-law of the deceased and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that marriage of the deceased/Smt.Anjali the daughter of the informant was solemnized with Anand Singh the son of the applicant on 19.5.2024. It is argued that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons including the applicant. It is argued that the husband of the deceased has been arrested and is in jail. It is argued that the cause of death as opined by the doctor is asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. It is argued that the applicant has been made accused in the present case because of she being a family member of the husband of the deceased. It is further argued that the applicant is a lady and is entitled to the benefit of Section 480 BNSS. It is argued that co-accused Ashish Kumar Singh (devar of the deceased) has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 31.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 37949 of

¶11

BAIL No. 39113 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

2025, copy of the said order has been produced before the Court which is taken on record. The applicant is having no criminal history as stated in para- 28 of the affidavit and is in jail since 23.7.2025.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶15

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. The applicant is a lady and as such she is entitled to the benefit of Section 480 BNSS. Cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. Coaccused Ashish Kumar Singh (devar of the deceased) has been granted bail by this Court.

¶16

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶17

Let the applicant- Sunita Devi, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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:-

¶18

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶19

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶20

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

¶21

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date

¶22

BAIL No. 39113 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023.

¶25

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 BNS, 2023.

¶26

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶27

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶28

The bail application is allowed.

¶29

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶30

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶31

November 10, 2025

¶32

Naresh

¶33

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

Sunita Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunita Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kripal Singh vs State of U.P.

Akash vs State of U.P.

Smt Santoshi Devi vs State of U.P.

Dudhnath vs State of U.P.

Ramladdoo @ Ramchander vs State of U.P.

Ramsumantar vs State of U.P.