Devwati and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 59 of 2024

Appellant :- Devwati And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lucknow Counsel for Appellant :- Amitabh Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

(Order on Appeal)

¶6

List in due course.

¶7

(Order on C.M.A. No. 01/2024)

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the appellants-applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

This bail application has been moved by the applicants with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 79 of 2014 u/s 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 4 of D.P. Act, Police StationMill Area, District- Raebareli.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that marriage of son of applicant no.1 (brother of appellant nos.2 and 3) was solemnized with daughter of the informant of the present case. Both husband and wife were enjoying their matrimonial life and two children were born out of their wedlock. The daughter-inlaw of appellant no.1 was short tempered and due to trivial issued arose between husband and wife, she closed the door of room, poured kerosene oil on her as well as on her children and put fire on the oil. As a result, her children and she received burn injuries.

¶11

It is further submitted that dying declaration of the children was recorded, in which, they categorically stated that their mother closed the door, poured kerosene oil and put fire. The evidence relied by the prosecution was not appreciated by learned trial Court in the correct perspective.

¶12

It is next submitted that on earlier date, order was passed for summoning of the medical report related to appellant no.1 and as per information, she is having several old age ailments and chronic pain of spine and she is also unable to perform daily routine.

¶13

It is lastly submitted that the appellants were on bail during the course of trial and they are in jail since 18.12.2023 and there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future, hence, the appellants may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that all the evidence relied by the prosecution has already been considered by learned trial Court and the appellants have been convicted. However, he does not dispute the fact that the appellants were on bail during the course of trial and in the statement of the children, who received burn injuries, they categorically stated in the their statements recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. that their mother closed the door, poured kerosene oil and put fire.

¶15

Having heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on record, it is evident that the appellants were on bail during the course of trial and appellant no.1 is mother-in-law who is suffering from chronic ailments.

¶16

Hence, prima facie, case for bail is made out, at this stage.

¶17

Accordingly, the application for bail is allowed .

¶18

Let the appellants- Devwati, Ramawadh and Ramkaran involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- each with two sureties in the like amount subject to following conditions:

¶19

(i) The appellants shall cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment.

¶20

(ii) The appellants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶22

As soon as personal bonds and sureties are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by the trial court concerned to be kept on record of this appeal.

¶23

Order Date :- 18.6.2025 Arpan

¶24

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

Devwati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devwati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lucknow

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

Chetram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Pawan Kumar Kori and Another vs Union of India through Intelligence Officer, Directorate of N.C.B, Lucknow

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

Sachin Lodh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Bhanu Pratap vs Union of India Thru. Investigation Officer Narcotics Control Bureau Lucknow

Sitaram vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others