Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11377 of 2018 Applicant :- Viddhotama Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri P.S. Sharma who has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and Sri Sri Indrajeet Singh, learned AGA for the State.
This is an application for bail on behalf of Viddhotama Pandey in Case Crime No. 1081 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Suhwal, district Ghazipur.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that she is the mother-in-law; there are general allegations with no specific role being assigned to the applicant; that the applicant lives separately of the deceased and her husband as said in paragraphs 10 and 13 of the affidavit; that there has been no demand of dowry or cruelty in connection with such demand as said in paragraph 13 of the affidavit; that it is a case of accident by fire where there is no complicity of anyone much less the applicant; that the cause of death shown in the autopsy report is shock as a result of ante-mortem burn injuries which is consistent with the case of accident by fire; that under the similar circumstances the father-in-law, co-accused Devendra Narayan Pandey has been admitted to the concession of bail by this Court vide order dated 15.03.2018, and, therefore, the applicant is entitled to bail on the ground of parity; and, that the applicant is a respectable woman with no criminal history, who is in jail in connection with the present crime since 29.01.2018.
Sri P.S. Sharma, learned counsel for the complainant has put up stiff opposition to the prayer for bail and has taken the Court through various statements of the prosecution witnesses and other evidence, which according to him do not entitle the applicant to bail. He further submits that the death is unnatural in the four walls of the matrimonial home within seven years of marriage with a background of dowry demand, therefore, applicant being mother-in-law is answerable for the said incident and the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of the father-in-law.
Learned AGA has also opposed the prayer for bail and adopted the submission of the learned counsel for the complainant.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the evidence appearing in the case, the general nature of allegations, the case being an accident by fire as alleged by the prosecution, the factum of parity, this Court without expressing any opinion on merits, finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Viddhotama Pandey 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.
However, it is directed that the trial pending before the concerned court below be concluded expeditiously, as early as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with Section 309 Cr.P.C. and in view of principle laid down in the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab reported in 2015 (3) SCC 220, if there is no legal impediment.
It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court shall initiate necessary coercive measures to ensure their presence positively.
Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for strict compliance.
Order Date :- 29.3.2018 Imroz