Smt. Guddi Devi v. State of U.P

Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42207 of 2023 Applicant :- Smt. Guddi Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sapan Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. Heard Mr. Sapan Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. Perused the record. This application for bail has been filed by applicant Smt. Guddi Devi seeking her enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 196 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B, 34, 504, 316 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Rajghat, District-Gorakhpur during the pendency of trial. Record shows that marriage of Chandan Verma, son of applicant was solemnized with Neha Verma on 13.12.2020. From the aforesaid wedlock, a male child was born. However, just after expiry of period of two years and four months from the date of marriage of the son of applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 5.5.2023, in which the daughter-in-law of the applicant namely, Neha has suffered injury. It is the case of applicant that immediately after the daughter-in-law suffered injury in the occurrence which took place on

5.5.2023, she was rushed to the hospital. At the time of medical examination, it was detected that she was in family way but there was no pulse in the embryo. Thereafter the dead embryo was taken out from her body. Unfortunately, the victim succumbed to the injuries sustained by her on 15.5.2023. After the death of deceased i.e. on 10.5.2023, a belated F.I.R. dated 15.5.2023 was lodged by first informant, brother of the deceased and was registered as Case Crime No. 196 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B, 34, 504, 316 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Rajghat, District-Gorakhpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R. 9 persons namely, Chandan Verma, Asharfilal Verma, Guddi, Ratan Verma, Ragini, Gunja, Ananya, Verma, Suresh Verma, Kamal Verma have been nominated as named accused. Learned counsel for applicant submits that that applicant is the mother in-law of deceased, a named as well as charge sheeted accused, inasmuch, charge sheet has already been submitted on

21.7.2023 against three of the named accused i.e mother-in-law (applicant herein), father-in-law and husband of deceased, whereas the other named accused have been exculpated. However, irrespective of above, applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. No deliberate act of assault was committed upon deceased. In the opinion of the autopsy surgeon, the cause of death of deceased is ante-mortem head injury. However, the deceased sustained only 1 contusion. Allegations made in the F.I.R. with regard to demand of dowry and commission of cruelty upon deceased on account of non fulfilment of same are false and concocted. The same are devoid of material particulars. No attempt has been made by the first informant to establish the same in his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. either. He has then referred to the judgement of the Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Others, (2022) 6 SCC 599. On the above premise, it is thus urged that since the allegations made in the F.I.R. regarding demand of additional dowry and commission of cruelty upon deceased on account of non-fulfilment of additional demand of dowry are devoid of material particulars, therefore, the same are liable to be ignored by this Court Court. It is lastly contended that since applicant is a lady therefore she is entitled to the benefit of provisions contained in proviso to section 437 Cr.P.C. On the above conspectus, he submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. Even otherwise, applicant is a woman of clean antecedents inasmuch as she has no criminal history to her credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 28.6.2023. As such, she has undergone more than four months of incarceration. Police report in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted against applicant, as such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by prosecution against applicant stands crystalized. However, upto this stage, no such, circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. It is thus urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with trial. Per contra, the learned A.G.A and the learned counsel for first informant have opposed this application for bail. They submit that since applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused, therefore he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. Attention of the Court was invited to the post mortem report of the deceased and much emphasis was laid to injury No.3 found on the body of deceased. They contend that no explanation has come forward with regard to the manner in which the deceased sustained aforesaid injury. The occurrence has taken place just after expiry of two years and four months from the date of marriage and in the marital home of deceased. As such, the death of deceased is a dowry death. In view of above, the burden is upon the applicant herself, as she is the mother-in-law of deceased and inmate of the house not only explain the manner of occurrence in terms of Section 106 but also her innocence under section 113 of the Evidence Act. However, the applicant has miserably failed to discharge the said burden, upto this stage. As such, no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant. However, they could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of material brought on record, evidence, nature and gravity of offense as well as complicity of applicant, accusation made coupled with the fact that since applicant is a lady, she is therefore entitled to the benefit of the provisions contained in proviso to section 437 Cr.P.C, the period of incarceration undergone, the clean antecedents of applicant, police report in terms of Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted against applicant, as such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystalized, yet inspite of above, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, the judgement of the Supreme court in Subhaschandra Gangwal and another Vs. The state of maharashtra and Another, 2023 Live law (SC) 373, applicant is the mother in law of deceased, prima facie, she cannot be said to be the benificiary of the alleged demand of dowry, the husband of the deceased i.e. the son of applicant is already in jail, therefore irrespective of the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to the present application for bail, but without making any comment on the merits of the case, the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Smt. Guddi Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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 HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above. Order Date :- 17.11.2023 Arshad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad