Allahabad High Court
Smt. Dhanlaxmi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 30 January, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6630
Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1846 of 2024
Applicant :- Smt. Dhanlaxmi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Pradhan,Kunwer Dhananjay Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused-applicant on anticipatory bail in case crime No.138 of 2016, under Section 306 I.P.C., P.S. Jaidpur, District Barabanki.
3. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 27.08.2024, the following order was passed:-
"Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.138/2019, under Section 306 I.P.C., P.S. Jaidpur, District Barabanki.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
In the prosecution case, it is alleged that son of the informant was married with the applicant on 23.11.2010. It is further alleged that due to enmity on 28.06.2016, the son of the complainant was taken at 02:00 pm by his in laws to the Paramarsh Kendra where he was beaten and administered poison which resulted in his death.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case which is evident from the fact that in the post mortem report, there is no ante mortem injury which falsified prosecution version.
He submits that viscera was preserved where cause of death could not be ascertained however, Ethyl Alcohol has been found which is precisely case of the applicant that her husband was often drunken and used to abuse her therefore, the F.I.R. was lodged by the applicant against her husband which is on record as Annexure No.7 on 10.04.2016. After two months, the deceased died which resulted in lodging of this F.I.R.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that ingredients to attract Section 306 IPC read with Section 107 IPC are utterly missing. Applicant has no criminal history. She is innocent. He submits that applicant is a lady. Applicant undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail and has submitted that applicant has no apprehension of arrest during investigation she was not arrested.
Issue notice to respondent No. 2.
Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is granted two weeks' time to file counter affidavit.
List on 18.09.2024.
On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the record and the fact that applicant is a lady, she has no criminal history, post mortem report, viscera report prima facie ingredients to attract Section 306 IPC appears to be missing and also considering the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant-Smt. Dhanlaxmi shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(1) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses.
(2) The accused-applicant will remain present on each and every date fixed by the trial court.
(3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. "
4. From perusal of the order dated 27.08.2024, it transpires that State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to substantiate that the present applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings.
5. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Smt. Dhanlaxmi till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:-
(i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) that 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 or tamper with the evidence;
(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and
(v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
6. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.
Order Date :- 30.1.2025
Mohd. Sharif
