Allahabad High Court
Smt. Gyanmati Devi @ Gyanwati vs State Of U.P. on 12 April, 2021
Author: Rekha Dikshit
Bench: Rekha Dikshit
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 13 Case :- BAIL No. - 4260 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt. Gyanmati Devi @ Gyanwati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Rekha Dikshit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State through video conferencing.
Perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as per the prosecution case accused persons including the present applicant who is mother-in-law of the deceased, aged about 60 years tortured the deceased due to non fulfilling the demand of dowry and gave electricity current, resulting in death. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that accused applicant does not have any active role in the commission of alleged crime. There is no incriminating evidence against the accused applicant for demand of dowry and consequently harassment or torture of the deceased. In fact, the deceased had gone to roof for drying the clothes. The high tension electricity wire is passing through roof. Accidently, she touched the high tension wire, as a result of which she died. As per the post mortem report, the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia due to ante mortem electric burn injury and except burn injury no external or internal injury was found on the body of the deceased. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant. There is no eye witness account of the alleged incident. She has no concern with the alleged incident. Thus, she has falsely been implication in the present case.
The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 27.10.2020. It is next submitted that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor she has any criminal history. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Smt. Gyanmati Devi @ Gyanwati involved in Case Crime No. 401 of 2020, under Sections 498A,304B IPC and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Akhand Nagar, District Sultanpur 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) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 12.4.2021 GSY