Allahabad High Court
Smt Sadhna Devi vs State Of U.P. on 17 August, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:165924
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8873 of 2023
Applicant :- Smt Sadhna Devi
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari,Deepak Upadhyay
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant today in the Court, the same is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.110 of 2002, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S.- Usrahar, District- Etawah.
4. Initially, an FIR was lodged by the informant (father of the deceased) alleging therein that the deceased Anita Devi was married with Rajesh s/o Tale Singh Batham in the year 1998 as per Hindu rituals. The informant had given dowry according to his status, but his daughter's-in-law was not satisfied with the dowry and demanded a color T.V.. It s alleged that they used to beat and harass her. Her daughter had come to her house several times and complained that her husband harassed her for not giving her TV. The informant prayed to her in-laws that he is a poor man, he will not be able to give TV. It is alleged that in the night Rajesh (husband of the deceased) killed his daughter by beating and hanging her. Thereafter, the matter was investigated and during investigation, name of the applicant came into light and thereafter, charge sheet was submitted against the applicant and co-accused- Rejesh (husband of the deceased).
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; the applicant is sister-in-law (Jethani of the deceased) aged about 51 years and she is suffering from several old age alignment. He submitted that the applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. He submitted that husband of the applicant was working in Indian Army and since her marriage she resides outside from her village with her husband, she has never demanded dowry. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that against the charge sheet, applicant approached before this Court by way of filing an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 1342 of 2003 and this Court stayed the proceedings of the case vide order dated 11.03.2023. He submitted that trial against the husband of the victim was completed in the year 2004 and he was acquitted by the court below vide its order dated 18.03.2004, copy of the same is annexed as Annexure No.1 to the supplementary affidavit. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the during trial, mother of the victim has turned hostile. The applicant is having no previous criminal history as has been mentioned in paragraph 24 of the affidavit. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicant is released on anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, she is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted.
7. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, she is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
8. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant-Smt Sadhna Devi, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall surrender her passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. Her passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(vii) 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.
9. In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
10. The Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months.
11. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands allowed.
Order Date :- 17.8.2023
Krishna*
