Allahabad High Court
Madhuri @ Mathura Devi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 19 July, 2023
Bench: Subhash Vidyarthi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:48172
Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 177 of 2023
Applicant :- Madhuri @ Mathura Devi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Secrt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek,Utkarsh Misra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
On 06.02.2023 after hearing the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. this Court had passed the following interim order -
"The applicant has moved the present application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. praying for grant of anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No.1852 of 2013 under sections 498A, 304B/201 I.P.C. and sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Nawabganj, district Gonda.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant who has filed supplementary affidavit today in court which is taken on record, and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Issue notice to private respondent.
List on 14.3.2023.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is mother in law. Presently, she is 61 years old. The co-accused Nankan alias Nanke Yadav has been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 13.10.2022 passed in Anticipatory Bail No.1608 of 2022. Two other co-accused Sumitra and Shivram Yadav have been released on anticipatory bail vide order dated 6.1.2023 passed in Anticipatory Bail No.17 of 2023.
It is submitted that the statement of mother of the deceased was recorded under section 161 CrPC wherein she has stated that the deceased was suffering from Epilepsy and reason for death is Epilepsy. Sister in law of the deceased has not supported the prosecution case in her statement under section 161 CrPC. In her statement she has stated that there was no demand of dowry and last rites of the deceased were conducted in presence of the parents of the deceased. The first information report was lodged after delay of five days. After investigation, the I.O. has filed Final Report which was challenged and eventually complaint case has been registered. There is no specific allegation in the prosecution case against the applicant. Even in the statements under section 200 and 202 CrPC, no specific allegation has been made against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history.
Learned counsel undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by the applicant's counsel.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the applicant is a lady having no criminal antecedents, the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that she shall cooperate in the trial, general allegations are made in the prosecution case, the co-accused have been released on anticipatory bail, and gravity of offence, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case in the light of judgment of Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, subject to her cooperation in the trial.
In view of the above as also keeping in view of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC OnLine 98, the accused applicant is directed to appear before trial court if she is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the following conditions.
(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;
(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;
Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.
It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses."
Although a counter affidavit has been filed, nothing has come to light which may persuade this Court to take a view, different from the view taken while passing the aforesaid order, nor the learned A.G.A. has pointed out any violation of the consideration of interim anticipatory bail committed by the applicant.
In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the interim order dated 06.02.2023 is hereby made absolute and the application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid order.
(Subhash Vidyarthi J.)
Order Date :- 19.7.2023/A.Nigam
