Suman @ Siya Rani Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.130 of 2025 under Section 85/80(2) BNS and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Nagram, District Lucknow.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that general allegations have been made in the prosecution case while lodging the FIR against five named accused persons, including two real brothers and the husband of the deceased. All were implicated on the same set of facts. However, on the basis of a certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan, the Investigating Officer has already dropped the names of three accused persons.

¶14

The applicant has been implicated solely because she happens to be the mother-in-law of the deceased. Even the informant, in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., initially assigned only a general role of demand of dowry to all the accused persons. Subsequently, he alleged a general role against the applicant and her son regarding demand of a vehicle.

¶15

It is further submitted that the cause of death, as per postmortem report, is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging and no other injury has been found on the body. It is noteworthy that the husband himself informed the police

¶16

BAIL No. 9407 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

about the incident, which is evident from the inquest report. During inquest proceedings, the complainant as well as the brother-in-law of the deceased were very much present, yet no complaint was made at that time. Thus, the FIR appears to be an afterthought.

¶19

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶20

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that the victim was pregnant at the time of the incident and there are allegations of demand of dowry soon before the death. The deceased died in unnatural circumstances within eight months of her marriage.I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record.

¶21

On due consideration to the facts that the applicant is in jail since 21.5.2025; the charge-sheet has already been filed in the matter; the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased; the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging; there appear to be general allegations levelled in the FIR and in the prosecution case against all the accused persons; the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶22

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶23

Let the applicant Suman @ Siya Rani be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions:

¶24

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶25

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize or intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶26

(iii) 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

¶27

BAIL No. 9407 of 2025

¶28

3

¶29

dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶30

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶31

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC (now Section 269 BNS).

¶32

(vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the 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 IPC (now Section 209 BNS).

¶33

September 26, 2025

¶34

Madhu D.R/P.S

¶35

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶36

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suman @ Siya Rani v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman @ Siya Rani v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Smt. Rama Devi Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rustam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy Home Lko. and 4 Others

Waseeb Ahmad (Basib Ahmad) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ehsaan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Neeraj Yadav Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Rakesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.