Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3620 of 2019 Applicant :- Maya Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Shoeb Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Mohd. Shoeb Khan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and also perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and she has committed no offence. It is next contended that only general allegations have been levelled against the applicant and there was no demand of dowry. The applicant is mother-in- law of the deceased. Further, no specific role is attributed to the applicant and the cause of death of the deceased was found to be hanging. The FIR is unduly delayed for more than a month for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. The husband of the deceased had taken away her to the hospital and also participated in Panchayetnama. There is no allegation to connect the applicant with the alleged offence. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that she is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make herself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.7.2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Maya Devi involved in Case Crime No. 298 of 2018, under Sections 498- A, 304-B, 201, 316 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushi Nagar be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) 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. 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 29.1.2019 IA