Allahabad High Court
Smt. Geeta vs State Of U.P. on 26 July, 2021
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- BAIL No. - 6718 of 2021
Applicant :- Smt. Geeta
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Srivastava,Pankaj Kumar Dixit
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Counter affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant-Smt. Geeta seeking bail in Case Crime No. 188 of 2021, under Sections-498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Colonelganj, District - Gonda.
Learned counsel for applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant case. The applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in FIR, in issue. The applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. Deceased (Nandini) and her son were living separately for more than last two years. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan and the entries made in the Ration Card and on the basis of the same, he further submitted that the deceased (Nandini) and her son were living separately from family of the applicant, as such, no offence, as stated in the FIR, is made out against the applicant.
He further submitted that Prag Dutt @ Parag Dutt, father-in-law of the deceased, who is the husband of the applicant, has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 09.07.2021 passed in Bail No.7048 of 2021. He also stated that the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra vs. State of U.P.; (2012) 10 SCC 741, are applicable in the present case. Prayer is to allow the applicable for bail.
Learned A.G.A., on the basis of averments made in the counter affidavit, has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, however, could not dispute the aforesaid contention made by learned counsel for applicant particularly the fact that the applicant is living separately as also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment, referred hereinabove.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties as also the fact that applicant is living separately and co-accused i.e. husband of the applicant Prag Dutt @ Parag Dutt, has already been released on bail and the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra (supra), without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, prima facie, the contention of the counsel for the applicant appears to be correct, as such, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant-Smt. Geeta, be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime Number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 her 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.
This order shall not influence the trial Court for proceeding with the trial.
The application stands disposed of.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by him alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 26.7.2021
Vinay/-
