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

Sheshmani Sharma vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7436 of 2018 Applicant :- Sheshmani Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Singh,Anurag Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application filed on behalf of Sheshmani Sharma in Case Crime No.411 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 304B, 120B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Gagaha, District Gorakhpur.
Heard Sri Anurag Rai, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Indrajeet Singh Yadav alongwith Sri Vivek Duvey, learned AGA appearing for the State.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is the father-in-law; that there are general allegations with no specific role being assigned to the applicant as asserted in paragraph 5 of the affidavit; that admittedly at the time of occurrence the applicant was living in connection with his work/employment at Lucknow as asserted in paragraphs 7, 13, 15 of the affidavit whereas the deceased met an accidental death by the fire at her native village in Gorakhpur when there was no one present at home.
Learned AGA has opposed the plea for bail with the submission the it is a case of an unnatural death of a wife within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial home with a background of dowry demand. As such, the applicant is not entitled to the concession of bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the gravity of the offence, the nature of allegations, the evidence appearing in the case, the relationship of the applicant to the deceased but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed.
Let the applicant Sheshmani Sharma involved in the aforesaid be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two-two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) 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 such person from disclosing 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, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 Shahroz
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sheshmani Sharma vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 February, 2018
Judges
  • J
Advocates
  • Birendra Singh Anurag Rai