Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2588 of 2019 Applicant :- Pushpa Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Gupta,Hari Pratap Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant has been falsely implicated in highly belated FIR lodged after three days of the incident of death of Raju, son of first informant; that as per inquest report of deceased, information of death of deceased was given by his father at 11:37 p.m. on 07.03.2018, and in FIR lodged on 10.03.2018 it was alleged by him that there was dispute between his son and daughter-in-law Pushpa on account of which, in the night of 07.03.2018 at about 11:00 p.m. she caused injuries on his vital part resulting in his death on the spot; that postmortem report states that deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem injuries which were five in number and out of which four are abrasions and one is contused swelling over neck; that in FIR and statement of first informant it has been stated that injury was caused at private part of deceased, but posrtmortem report does not suggest any injury on his private part; that after a period of 20 days from death, statement of Ashish, son of deceased and Smt. Savitri Devi, a neighbour has been recorded who have assigned the applicant with the role of kicking at the private part of deceased resulting in his death; that Ashish has also stated that applicant strangulated deceased after catching him by neck; that applicant had no reason or motive to cause death of deceased; that even if there was any quarrel between husband and wife, the deceased was a drunkard, may have sustained some injury accidentally, and applicant may not have any intention to cause his death; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that she will not misuse the liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 10.03.2018.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that death of deceased has taken place inside the house of applicant and none other than her can be author of his injuries.
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 Pushpa Devi be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0089 of 2018 under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Gagaha District Gorakhpur 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 :- 22.1.2019 M. ARIF