Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Manorama Devi @ Munari Devi vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 November, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41750 of 2018 Applicant :- Manorama Devi @ Munari Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated being married Nanad of deceased; that the FIR has been lodged by brother of the deceased on 23.06.2018 under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 302 IPC and 3/4 DP Act with the allegations that the deceased was married to co-accused Sunil Chauhan in the year 2012 and was being treated with cruelty for non fulfilment of demand of dowry, and on 22.06.2018 her husband and in-laws caused her death by strangulation for non fulfilment of demand of dowry; that charge sheet was submitted under Sections 498-A, 304 and 302 IPC and 3/4 DP Act; that the applicant never made any demand of dowry from the deceased not treated her with cruelty for non fulfilment of alleged demand of dowry; that applicant was living in her sasural and had come to her maika just one day before the incident for attending the Mundan Sanskar of her nephew, the son of deceased; that the applicant had no motive to cause of death of applicant and there is no incriminating evidence to show that she participated in committal of strangulation of deceased; that the case of applicant is distinguishable from Sunil Chauhan, the husband of deceased; that the applicant has no criminal history; that the applicant undertakes that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail; that the applicant is in custody since 09.07.2018.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Manorama Devi @ Munari Devi be released on bail in Case Crime No. 100 of 2018 under Sections 498-A, 304, 302 I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Maniyar District Ballia on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
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.
Order Date :- 28.11.2018 M. ARIF
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Manorama Devi @ Munari Devi vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 November, 2018
Judges
  • Harsh Kumar
Advocates
  • Anand Kumar Pandey