Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Urmila vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|24 December, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40402 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt. Urmila Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Laxmi Narayan Rathour Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 248 of 2021 under Sections 306 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali Jalaun, District - Jalaun with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The FIR of this incident was lodged against in-laws of the complainant's sister and it was alleged in the FIR that the husband of complainant's sister was having an insurance policy, he died in a road accident and after his death the complainant's sister was given Rs. 5 lakhs by the Insurance Company. It was also mentioned in the report that the in-laws of the complainant's sister were demanding the said amount of insurance policy and in the night of 02.07.2021 the complainant's sister was beaten and murdered by them. Initially, the FIR was lodged under Section 302 IPC and during investigation it was converted into Section 306 IPC.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that she is mother-in-law of the deceased and has bail parity with co-accused Shivkumar (father-in- law), who has already been granted bail by this Court and his bail order submitted by the learned counsel is taken on record. The role assigned to the present accused was similar to the role assigned to co-accused, who has already been granted bail. It is also submitted that the deceased died due to hanging herself. There is no evidence on record to show that the applicant abetted or instigated or coerced the deceased to commit suicide. There is nothing on record which could show that any overt act was committed by the present accused in the occurrence of the alleged incident. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 30.07.2021 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicant Smt. Urmila in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;
(2). 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 of the Indian Penal Code;
(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(4). The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of her bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.12.2021 LBY
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

Smt Urmila vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
24 December, 2021
Judges
  • Ajit Singh
Advocates
  • Laxmi Narayan Rathour