Smt. Shakuntala vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39641 of 2025

Smt. Shakuntala

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: B.N.Singh, Manish Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 66

¶6

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶7

1. List revised.

¶8

Heard Sri Manish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶9

This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Smt. Shakuntala, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 71 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2), 115(2) BNS and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Reuna, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued as follows:

¶11

(i) The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶12

(ii) The applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased Priyansi.

¶13

(iii) The marriage of the deceased Priyansi was solemnized with Ram Kumar son of the applicant on 22.09.2023.

¶14

(iv) General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant. FIR has been lodged after inordinate delay of about 7 days.

¶15

(v) Postmortem examination report shows the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging with single ligature mark.

¶16

BAIL No. 39641 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

(vi) Ram Kumar the husband of the deceased is in jail, para 38 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court.

¶19

(vii) The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 39 of the affidavit and is in jail since 31.08.2025.

¶20

(viii) The applicant is a lady and she is entitled to the benefit of Section 480 BNSS.

¶21

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶22

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Ram Kumar the husband of the deceased is in jail. The applicant is a lady.

¶23

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.

¶24

Let the applicant Smt. Shakuntala , 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:-

¶25

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

¶26

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.

¶27

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she/he 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.

¶28

BAIL No. 39641 of 2025

¶29

3

¶30

(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/him presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her/him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023.

¶31

(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/him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her/him under Section 269 BNS, 2023.

¶32

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

¶33

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.

¶34

The bail application is allowed .

¶35

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

¶36

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶37

November 13, 2025 M. ARIF

¶38

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Shakuntala v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shakuntala 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi vs State of U.P.

Puneet Mishra vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijaypal Kasana vs State of U.P.

Dashrath Agrahari vs State of U.P.

Chandravati Devi vs State of U.P.

Kaushal Verma vs State of U.P.