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

Nattho Devi vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|12 October, 2018


Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39730 of 2018 Applicant :- Nattho Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
This application for bail has been filed by the applicant-Nattho Devi seeking her enlargement on bail during trial in Case Crime No. 0882 of 2018 under Sections 498A and 306 IPC, P.S.-Sadar Bazar, District-Agra.
From the record, it appears that the marriage of the son of the applicant namely Rakesh was solemnized with Sunita on 07.03.2000. From the aforesaid wedlock, no issues were born. An unfortunate incident occurred on 24.07.2018, in which the daughter- in-law of the applicant namely Sunita died. The first information report in respect of the aforesaid incident was lodged on 25.07.2018 not by the applicant or any of his family members but by the father of the deceased. The said F.I.R. came to be registered as Case Crime No. 0882 of 2018 under Sections 498A and 302 IPC, P.S.-Sadar Bazar, District-Agra.
In the F.I.R. referred to above, three persons namely, the husband- Rakesh, mother-in-law i.e. the present applicant and Raju, the Devar of the deceased were nominated as the accused persons. Thereafter, the inquest on the body of the deceased was conducted by the Police on 25.07.2018 on the information given by the father of the deceased. The panch witnesses concluded that the cause of death of the deceased was suicidal. The post mortem of the deceased was conducted on 25.07.2018. The Doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased, opined that the cause of death is asphyxia on account of ante-mortem hanging. The Police upon completion of the statutory investigation of the aforesaid case crime number submitted the charge sheet dated 28.08.2018 whereby all the three named accused persons have been charge sheeted under Sections 498A and 306 IPC, P.S.-Sadar Bazar, District-Agra. Learned counsel for the applicant submits the first information report was initially lodged against the applicant and two others under Sections 302, 498A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D. P. Act but the Police upon investigation has submitted the charge-sheet under Sections 306 and 498A I.P.C.. He therefore submits that there is an inherent fallacy in the prosecution case as no offence with regard to demand of dowry was found to have been committed by the applicant. It is next submitted that the deceased has died on account of committing suicide by hanging herself. Elaborating his submission, he submits that the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. can be established only during the course of trial as the same is subject to trial evidence. Upto this stage, there is no such evidence on record to show that the applicant has conspired or instigated the deceased in committing suicide. The applicant is an old lady aged about 70 years and is in jail since 27.07.2018. The applicant has no criminal antecedent to her credit except the present one. Lastly it is submitted that though the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the son of the applicant 18 years ago but they have not been blessed with any child and on account of the aforesaid frustration, the deceased is alleged to have committed suicide. On the cumulative strength of the aforesaid, it is urged that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Per contra, the learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual and legal submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant.
Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the material on record and the complicity of the applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-Nattho 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:-
(i) 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.
(ii) 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 I.P.C..
(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., 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 174-A I.P.C.
(iv) 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 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.
(v) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.
However, it is made clear that any willful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 12.10.2018 YK
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Nattho Devi vs State Of U P


High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

12 October, 2018
  • Rajeev Misra
  • Ajay Kumar Pandey