Satto Devi vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53501

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6050 of 2025

Applicant :- Satto Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Singh,Adarsh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

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

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure / under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Satto Devi , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 49 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Garipukhta, District Shamli.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued as follows:-

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

(iii) The marriage of the deceased Lakshmi was solemnized with Sachin the son of the applicant around three years back.

¶13

(iv) General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant.

¶14

(v) It is submitted that no external injury was seen on the body of the deceased. The cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. The viscera report is awaited.

¶15

(vi) It is further submitted that charge-sheet in the matter has been submitted against the applicant, Raj Kumar the father-in-law and Sachin the husband of the deceased whereas the other co-accused five in number have been exonerated.

¶16

(vii) The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 23 and is in jail since 20.11.2024.

¶17

(viii) Co-accused Raj Kumar the father-in-law of the deceased has been granted

¶18

bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40137 of 2024, the copy of the said order is annexed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit.

¶19

(ix) The applicant is a lady and she is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C.

¶20

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

¶21

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 of the deceased could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. Co-accused Raj Kumar the father-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail. The applicant is a lady.

¶22

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.

¶23

Let the applicant- Satto 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:-

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

(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.

¶27

(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 82 Cr.P.C., 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, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

¶28

(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 313 Cr.P.C. 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

¶29

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 229A IPC.

¶30

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

¶31

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.

¶32

The bail application is allowed .

¶33

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

¶34

Order Date :- 11.4.2025 AS Rathore

¶35

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶36

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satto Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satto 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Milan vs State of U.P.

Usha Devi vs State of U.P.

Aziz vs State of U.P.

Deepak vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Alias Monu vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kalawati vs State of U.P.