Allahabad High Court
Smt. Gayawati vs State Of U.P. on 7 August, 2023
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:158159 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34512 of 2023 Applicant :- Smt. Gayawati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sabhajeet,Nishad Ramjanki Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hari Nath Chaubey Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Sabhajeet,Nishad Ramjanki, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Hari Nath Chaubey, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2.
2. Perused the record.
3. Instant application for bail has been filed by applicant-Smt. Gayawati seeking her enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 0084 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station-Bakewar, District-Fatehpur, during the pendency of trial.
4. Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 14.04.2023, a delayed F.I.R. dated 24.04.2023 was lodged by first informant Prema Beba (mother of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No. 0084 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station-Bakewar, District-Fatehpur,. In the aforesaid F.I.R., five persons namely Bhan Singh, Shiv Darshan, Gyawati (applicant herein), Kiran and Santram have been nominated as named accused.
5. Learned counsel for applicant contends that though the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased, a named and charged sheeted accused inasmuch as charge sheet has been submitted on 14.07.2023, yet she is liable to be enlarged on bail. Attention of the Court was then invited to the provisions contained in proviso to Section 437 Cr.P.C. and on basis thereof, it is thus urged that by virtue of above, the applicant being a woman is liable to be enlarged on bail. According to the learned counsel for applicant, in the F.I.R. it has been alleged that additional demand of dowry to the tune to Rs. 2 Lakhs and a Motorcycle were made. However, the allegations so made in the F.I.R. is vague and bald as the same is devoid of material particulars. The same has not been explained/detailed in the F.I.R nor in the statement of first informant as recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Referring to the judement of the Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and others Vs. State of Bihar and Others, (2022) 6SCC 599, he submits that the said allegations are therefore liable to be ignored by this Court at this stage. Applicant is the mother-in-law of deceased. Therefore, she cannot be said to be the beneficiary of the additional demand of dowry. The husband of the deceased is already languishing in jail. The deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken the extreme step of terminating her life by committing suicide. Bonafide of the applicant is also explicit from the fact that as per opinion of Autopsy Surgeon the death of the deceased is homicidal death inasmuch as the cause of death of deceased is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The ante-mortem injuries found on the body of the deceased are by themselves not sufficient to cause death of the deceased. Moreover the said injuries can not be said to be grievous or fatal. Even otherwise, applicant is a lady and in custody since 30.05.2023. As such, she has undergone more than two months of incarceration. Applicant is a lady of clean antecedents inasmuch as she has no criminal history to her credit except the present one. The police report (charge-sheet) in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such the entire evidence sought to relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallised. Upto this stage, no such incriminating circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. He therefore contends that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.
6. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that since the applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused therefore she does deserve any indulgence by this Court. Attention of the Court was also invited to the post mortem report and on the basis thereof it is thus urged that autopsy surgeon who conducted autopsy of the body of deceased found as many as six ante mortem injuries on the body of the deceased. However no explanation regarding the same has come forward from the applicant The deceased was a young lady aged about 22 years who has died in suspicious circumstance. Occurrence has taken place in the house of applicant and within seven years of the marriage of the deceased, therefore, the burden is upon the applicant to explain the manner of occurrence as well as his innocence in terms of Section 106 and Section 113B of Evidence Act. However, applicant has miserably failed to discharge the said burden upto this stage. They therefore submit that applicant does not deserve any sympathy of this Court. However, they could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon consideration of material on record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, accusations made as well as complicity of applicant coupled with the fact that applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased, since applicant is a lady therefore she is entitled to the benefit of the provisions contained in proviso to Section 437 Cr.P.C., police report (charge-sheet) under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystalized, however, the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for first informant could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the course of trial, the judgement of Apex Court in Sumit Subhashchandra Gangwal Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 373 (Paragraph 5), as per opinion of Autopsy Surgion, the death of deceased is a suicidal death as the cause of death of deceased is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging, applicant cannot be said to be the beneficialry of additional demand of dowry, the allegations made in the F.I.R. regarding additional demand of dowry are vague and bald allegations as the same are devoid of material particulars, the judgement of the Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and others (supra), the period of incarceration undergone by applicant and the clean antecedents of applicant but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.
8. Accordingly, present application for bail is allowed.
9. Let the applicant-Smt. Gayawati involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) Applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(ii) Applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) Applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) Applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant and send her to prison Order Date :- 7.8.2023 YK