Arti Devi vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40362

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8719 of 2025

Applicant :- Arti Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ganesh Mani,Sugandha Yadav,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Ganesh Mani, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Arti Devi , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 900 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80(2) B.N.S., and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar.

¶9

Learned counsel for the State states that he has received instructions in the matter for which time was granted to him on 12.03.2025.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased Smt. Kiran Yadav. She has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with Aman Yadav the son of the applicant in the year 2021. It is further argued that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant. The deceased committed suicide which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, the deceased has received a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. It is argued that the husband of the deceased is not an accused in the matter whereas Joginder Yadav the father-in-law and Aarti Devi the mother-in-law of the deceased are accused. It is submitted that the applicant is a lady and is entitled to the benefit of Section 480 B.NS.S. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 and is in jail since 08.01.2025.

¶11

Per contra , learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the first information report along with other accused person and there are allegations against her.

¶12

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased. General and omnibus

¶13

allegations have been levelled against the applicant. The cause of death of the deceased is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. The husband of the deceased is not an accused. The applicant is a lady and is entitled to the benefit of Section 480 B.NS.S.

¶14

The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Joginder Yadav.

¶15

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.

¶16

Let the applicant- Arti 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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 B.N.S.S., 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, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023.

¶21

(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 B.N.S.S., 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 him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023.

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

The bail application is allowed .

¶25

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

¶26

Order Date :- 20.3.2025 AS Rathore

¶27

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶28

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

Arti Devi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arti 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Surendra Yadav vs State of U.P.

Rinku Alias Ravi vs State of U.P.

Kapil Tyagi vs State of U.P.

Vijay Jaiswal vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishwajeet vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Monu vs State of U.P.