Allahabad High Court
Poonam Jha vs State Of U.P. And Another on 25 August, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:171798
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 9286 of 2023
Applicant :- Poonam Jha
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Raj Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1. Heard Mr. V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Abhay Raj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
2. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.832 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304B, 504 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Tundla, District Firozabad.
3. Mr. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicant. The applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased aged about 52 years and suffering from several old disease. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 15.11.2022 whereas the impugned FIR has been lodged on 06.12.2022 i.e. after 21 days of the alleged incident without any plausible explanation regarding delay in lodging the FIR. He further submits that on the fateful day at about 10.30 am when the the son of the applicant and her wife Divya reached near Asan Chauraha Jalesar Road, suddenly the health condition of Divya got deteriorated and subsequently she became unconscious, as such, the son of the applicant took his wife nearby Ravi Unity Hospital, Firozabad from where dr. advised to take his wife to another hospital, then immediate son of applicant reached F.H. Medical College, Tundla where the doctors declared her brought dead. As per postmortem report, no external or internal injury has been found on the person of the deceased and in absence of any external or internal injuries, the doctors could not be able to ascertain the cause of death, hence, viscera/pieces of vital organs of the deceased have been preserved for chemical analysis. As per FSL report, no poisons substance has been found. Mr. Srivastava has drawn attention of the Court towards death certificate wherein date of admission is mentioned as 15.11.2022 at about 11.40 am and thereafter on the same day, the deceased was died due to cardiac arrest. Before death, the applicant and her son have informed the family members of the deceased on 15.11.2022 at about 11.00 am and at the time of cremation of the deceased, the applicant alogwith her family members were also present. He further submits that allegation in respect of domestic article and ornaments worth Rs.5 lakhs and spending Rs.10 lakh in the marriage are completely false and vague, particularly, when the deceased and her son had already solemnized love marriage. Only general allegations have been levelled. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. From perusal of the impugned FIR as well as material brought on record, no case under Section 304-B IPC is made out against the applicant, particularly, when only general allegations of alleged demand of dowry and alleged conspiracy has been made in the FIR against the applicant, which are not sufficient even to charge the applicant under Section 304-B IPC. The applicant is having no criminal antecedent as alleged in paragraph 44 of the affidavit.
4. Mr. Srivastava further submits that the investigation is going on and till date no charge sheet has been submitted. The applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.
5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant.
6. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, particularly, seeing the fact that the applicant is mother-in-law aged about 53 years as well as allegation levelled against the applicant, the 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.
7. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant-Poonam Jha, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial 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 her 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 she 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.
8. 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.
9. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application is allowed.
Order Date :- 25.8.2023
Ajeet
