Sudha v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. - 72 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12738 of 2023 Applicant :- Sudha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- S.P.S. Chauhan,Sukhendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶1List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Heard Sri S.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bhawishya Sharma, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.

¶2The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 206 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Chandaus, District Aligarh, with a prayer to enlarge her on anticipatory bail.

¶3As per prosecution story, the marriage of the son of the applicant Sudhir was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu rites on 13.4.2019. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for a demand of a bullet motorcycle in dowry, thereby leading to her death in the night of 24/25.7.2023.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has the apprehension of her arrest. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has next stated that the FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. It is next stated that the applicant is the mother-in-law and has nothing to do with the said offence. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of anti-mortem hanging. It is next stated that the deceased had two young siblings and it is the applicant, who is their sole guardian.

¶5Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against her. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, she will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶6On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶7On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶8Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may be adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.

¶9In the event of arrest of the applicant, Sudha involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- 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 him 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 previous permission of the court; iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶10In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶11It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. (Justice Krishan Pahal) Order Date :- 22.11.2023\Shalini High Court of Judicature at Allahabad