High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Akash Tomar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vikas Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kuldeep Johri, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the first informant submits that he has filed vakalatnama in the office on 17.03.2025. The same is not on record.

4. Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet.

5. This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Lalman Maurya, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 313 of 2024, under Sections 80(2), 85, 115(2), 352 BNS and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at Police Station Atarra, District Banda.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased Ratna Devi and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that although in the FIR six accused persons including the applicant are named as accused but the investigation has concluded in which charge sheet has been submitted only against the applicant/Lalman Maurya/father-in-law and Rajendra Maurya the husband of the deceased whereas Tara Devi/mother-in-law, Deepak/devar, Shanno Devi/nand and Maan Singh/jeeja of the deceased have been exonerated. It is submitted that the deceased although was found to have received a puncture vigo mark over the skin of dorsal side of right wrist but the cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was preserved, the same goes to show that the same did not contribute to her death. It is further submitted that the viscera report after examination found aluminium phosphide in it. It is submitted that the present case is of consumption of poison. It is submitted that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and other accused persons. It is further submitted that the falsity of the prosecution case would also be evident from the fact that four accused out of six named persons have been exonerated by the police. It is submitted that the investigation has concluded and charge sheet has been submitted and as such there are no chances of the applicant tampering with evidence. It is submitted that Rajendra Maurya the husband of the deceased is in jail. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 44 and 45 of the affidavit and is in jail since 18.12.2024.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant submitted that the accused persons left the deceased in the hospital and disappeared which goes to show that their inhuman conduct. It is submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and there are allegations against him.

8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. Rajendra Maurya the husband of the deceased is in jail. The cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved which was found to be containing poison. Four accused out of six named accused persons have been exonerated during investigation. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted against the applicant.

9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the applicant Lalman Maurya, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 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, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023. (v) 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 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 19.3.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Akash Tomar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vikas Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kuldeep Johri, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the first informant submits that he has filed vakalatnama in the office on 17.03.2025. The same is not on record.

4. Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet.

5. This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Lalman Maurya, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 313 of 2024, under Sections 80(2), 85, 115(2), 352 BNS and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at Police Station Atarra, District Banda.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased Ratna Devi and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that although in the FIR six accused persons including the applicant are named as accused but the investigation has concluded in which charge sheet has been submitted only against the applicant/Lalman Maurya/father-in-law and Rajendra Maurya the husband of the deceased whereas Tara Devi/mother-in-law, Deepak/devar, Shanno Devi/nand and Maan Singh/jeeja of the deceased have been exonerated. It is submitted that the deceased although was found to have received a puncture vigo mark over the skin of dorsal side of right wrist but the cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was preserved, the same goes to show that the same did not contribute to her death. It is further submitted that the viscera report after examination found aluminium phosphide in it. It is submitted that the present case is of consumption of poison. It is submitted that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and other accused persons. It is further submitted that the falsity of the prosecution case would also be evident from the fact that four accused out of six named persons have been exonerated by the police. It is submitted that the investigation has concluded and charge sheet has been submitted and as such there are no chances of the applicant tampering with evidence. It is submitted that Rajendra Maurya the husband of the deceased is in jail. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 44 and 45 of the affidavit and is in jail since 18.12.2024.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the first informant submitted that the accused persons left the deceased in the hospital and disappeared which goes to show that their inhuman conduct. It is submitted that the applicant is named in the FIR and there are allegations against him.

8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. Rajendra Maurya the husband of the deceased is in jail. The cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved which was found to be containing poison. Four accused out of six named accused persons have been exonerated during investigation. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted against the applicant.

9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the applicant Lalman Maurya, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 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, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023. (v) 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 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 19.3.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad