High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53342 of 2021 Applicant :- Smt.Saroj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prakhar Srivastava,Prabhat Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Prabhat Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the record. 3. Instant bail application has been filed by applicant- Smt.Saroj seeking her enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 325 of 2021 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Khanpur, District-Bulandshahar, during pendency of the trial. 4. It transpires from record that Marriage of Neha i.e daughter
Legal Reasoning
of first informant Sri Rajkumar was solemnized with Akash (son of applicant)on 16.02.2016 in accordance with Hindu Rites
Legal Reasoning
and Customs. From the aforesaid wedlock, twin daughter were born. However after expiry of a period of little more than five years and six months of the marriage of the son of applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 07.09.2021, in which, the daughter-in-law of applicant died because of electrocution. 5. According to applicant, immediately after the occurrence, information regarding aforesaid incident was given by family members of applicant to the family members of deceased. Subsequently, a delayed F.I.R. dated 09.09.2021 was lodged by first informant Sri Rajkumar which was registered as Crime No. 325 of 2021 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Khanpur, District-Bulandshahar. In the aforesaid F.I.R. four persons namely 1. Akash (husband) 2. Smt. Saroj (mother-in-law) 3. Pramod (cousin father-in-law, Chacha Saru) 4. Cheenoo (cousin brother-in-law) of deceased has been arraigned as named accused. 6. According to prosecution story as unfolded in F.I.R. it is alleged that marriage of Neha, daughter of first informant was solemnized with Akash (son of applicant) on 16.02.2016 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Custom. Just after aforesaid marriage, additional demand of dowry by way of four wheeler was made by family members of applicant. On account of non- fulfilment of additional demand of dowry, physical and mental cruelty was committed upon deceased. Ultimately on 6/7.09.2021, Neha, daughter of first informant was put to death. 5. After registration of aforesaid F.I.R, Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C. Inquest (Panchayatnama) of the body of deceased was conducted on 07.09.2021. In the opinion of Panch witnesses, nature of death of deceased was accidental. Thereafter, post-mortem of the body of deceased Neha was conducted on the same day i.e. 07.09.2021. In the opinion of Autopsy Surgeon cause of death of deceased was Shock due to Electrocution . The Autopsy Surgeon found following ante-mortem injuries on the body of deceased: "i. Multiple wounds over body suggestive of electrocution of size varying from 14 cm to 2 cm. ii. On Exploration, wounds were present upto breast, lower aspect of left thigh, posterior aspect of right thigh, right shoulder and right wrist. 7. Upon completion of investigation of afore-mentioned case crime number, Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet dated22.11.2021, whereby Akash (husband of deceased) and Saroj (mother-in-law of deceased) have been charge-sheeted whereas the other two named accused have been exculpated. 8. Learned counsel for applicant contends that though the applicant is mother-in-law of deceased Neha and is a named as well as charged-sheeted accused but she is innocent. Applicant has been falsely implicated in aforesaid case crime number. Allegations made in F.I.R. are false and concocted. As such, applicant is being falsely prosecuted in concerned case crime number. It is then contended that Applicant is a middle aged lady aged about 51 years. Placing reliance upon proviso to Section 437 Cr.P.C., learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant-Smt. Saroj being a woman is liable to be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that bonifide of applicant is explicit from the fact that as per post-mortem report it is categorically opined by Autopsy Surgeon that deceased has died on account of electrocution. There is nothing on record on the basis of which it can be definitely inferred that the applicant has even abetted in the commission of crime in question. Allegations made in the F.I.R. with regard to demand of dowry are false. Moreover, applicant cannot be said to be the beneficiary of the alleged Additional demand of dowry. General and omnibus allegations regarding demand of dowry have been made. Applicant is a women of clean antecedents inasmuch as she has no criminal history to her credit expect the present one. Applicant is in Jail since 09.11.2021. As such, she has undergone more one three and a half months of incarceration. In case applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial. Charge-sheet has already been submitted therefore the evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallised. As such, custodial arrest of applicant is not absolutely necessary during the course of trial. On the aforesaid premise, learned counsel for applicant urged that applicant be enlarged on bail. 10. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State has opposed the present bail application. Learned A.G.A. submits that applicant is a named as well as charge-sheeted accused therefore she does not deserve any sympathy of this Court. Applicant is mother-in- law of deceased. She is under burden to establish her innocence by virtue of Section 113B of Indian Evidence Act. Occurrence has taken place in the house of applicant, therefore, she is required to establish the manner of occurrence in terms of Section 106 Indian Evidence Act. Applicant has not discharged the aforesaid burden and therefore she does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. However, the Learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual and legal submissions urged by learned counsel for applicant. 11. Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State, upon consideration of evidence on record, accusation made as well as complicity of applicant but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail. 12. Let the applicant-Smt.Saroj involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail 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) Applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence. (ii) 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) Applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) Applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 13. 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 of applicant and send her to prison. 14. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant is allowed. Order Date :- 28.3.2022 YK Digitally signed by YASHWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.03.31 10:21:15 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad