Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43147 of 2017 Applicant :- Shashi Kumari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.B. Sahai,R.K. Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Counter affidavit on behalf of the State and Supplementary Affidavit on behalf of the applicant filed today, are taken on record.
Heard Sri R.K. Shahi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kamal Singh Yadav, learned AGA along with Sri Vivek Dubey, appearing for the State.
This is an application for bail on behalf of Shashi Kumari in Case Crime No. 235 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Rampur Kharkhana, District Deoria.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is an unmarried sister-in-law (Nand); that there are general allegations against the entire family with no specific role being assigned to the applicant as said in paragraph 14 of the affidavit; that it has been asserted in paragraph 12 of the affidavit that applicant is a young girl aged about 16-17 years; that the deceased has committed suicide on account of the fact that she wanted to live separately of the husband's family as said in paragraph 10 of the affidavit; that there was no dowry demand or harassment immediately preceding the incident as said in paragraph 11 of the affidavit; that the allegation which was earlier put across on behalf of the prosecution that the police has done videography of the statement of the victim when she was taken to hospital by the No. 108 Ambulance along with police facility of No.100 is demonstrably incorrect as would appear from a perusal of the case diary. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant has invited the Court's attention, particularly, to the statement that is part of the case diary and annexed to the supplementary affidavit being the statement of the doctor, the Head Constable who was heading the 100 number police vehicle and S.I. Sanjay Kumar posted at the hospital where the deceased was admitted to a burn ward; that the doctor at the hospital, the Head Constable heading the police 100 number police facility and the Sub-Inspector, all of them have not made any mention of the victim's statement being recorded or videographed; that in fact the police constable of the 100 number police facility and the Sub- Inspector Sanjay Kumar in their statement have categorically denied recording any statement or dying declaration or videograph of the deceased; that in the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant in this state of evidence the allegation against the applicant is absolutely general in nature with no evidence appearing against her; and that the applicant who is a young, respectable woman is in jail since 12.08.2017 in connection with the present crime.
The learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail with the submission that it is a heinous crime where allegations in the FIR are damning against the entire family. However, learned AGA does not dispute the fact that there is no basis for any specific allegation against the applicant either in the FIR or elsewhere.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation, the gravity of the offence, the severity of the punishment, the relationship of the applicant to the deceased who is unmarred sister-in-law (Nand) and her age being 16-17 years but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court find it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
It is further made clear that this order will not enure to the benefit of the other co-accused in this case.
Let the applicant Shashi Kumari involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
4. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it is open to the opposite party to approach this Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 27.3.2018 Imroz