Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57449 of 2019 Applicant :- Smt. Savitri Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose),Mohd. Kalim Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel filed Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged against 3 persons including the applicant. The applicant is mother-in-law of son of the deceased. The daughter of applicant namely Poonam Keshari was married with Sushil Keshari, son of deceased Parvati Devi. In FIR it has been mentioned that there was some matrimonial dispute in between first informant Sushil Keshari and daughter of applicant. On 19.5.2015 at about 8.30 A.M. the applicant and her son Deena Keshari reached at the Sasural of Poonam Keshari where Poonam Keshari set the deceased on fire after pouring kerosene oil. The deceased died on 23.7.2015 during treatment after 4 days of the alleged incident. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that in FIR no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Only it has been mentioned that at the time of alleged incident the applicant was present at the house of the deceased. The main role of setting deceased on fire after pouring kerosene oil has been assigned to co-accused Poonam Keshari. It has further been submitted that in this case the I.O. has submitted final report. The informant has filed protest petition against the final report which was treated as complaint and thereafter on the basis of statements of complainant and witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. the applicant has been summoned to face trial. It has further been submitted that there is no cogent evidence against the applicant to connect with the alleged offence. She has falsely been implicated in the present case due to being mother of co-accused Poonam keshari. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 30.8.2019.
Per contra; learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the FIR. The applicant has been summoned to face trial. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that in the statement of Santosh Keshari it has come that at the time of alleged incident the applicant was also present at the house of deceased and she told to Santosh Keshari that applicant and other co-accused have set the deceased on fire. It has further been submitted that applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, she is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Smt. Savitri Devi involved in Case Crime No. 0194 of 2015, under section 304, 506 IPC, P.S. Maduwadeeh, District Varanasi be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. She shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the trial.
3. She shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 20.12.2019 Masarrat