High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on bail during the trial in FIR/ Case Crime No. 441 of 2024, under section 103 (1), 85, 80, 123 of BNS and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.- Gosainganj, District - Sultanpur. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a woman and is languishing in jail since 12.12.2024. He added that the daughter-in-law as well as the son of the applicant administered the poison themselves and they were taken to the hospital where they were died. He added that the husband of the applicant took the daughter-in-law as well as the son to the hospital, wherein after some time they died. He added that there is no sign of injury over the body of the deceased as to prove that the poison was corrosively administered to them. He next added that a video of 55 seconds was prepared by some stranger and the Investigating Officer took the same and on the basis of that video, the applicant and her husband has been implicated. He added that there would be no sanctity of this video as this is not possible to prove the sanctity of those videos as it is not evident from any of the document that what was the mental status and physical condition of the deceased at the time when they stated and that was prepared by some stranger. He next submits that the son of the applicant and the daughter-in-law solemnized the marriage arise out of love marriage and the applicant and her husband were intervened in their relations though fact remains that they usually quarreled with each other. He also added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen, there is no previous criminal antecedent and she is languishing in jail since 12.12.2024 and she undertakes that in case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the FIR and the son of the applicant as well as the daughter in law died in her house. He submits that there are serious allegations against the applicant and she is not entitled for bail. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is a woman and languishing in jail since 12.12.2024. The charge sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that she would tamper the evidences. This Court has also noticed the fact that the husband of the applicant took the deceased to the hospital where they died. Except apart the video, which was recorded by some stranger, there seems to be no other evidence against the applicant and situation seems to be improbable that why a mother shall administer the poison to her own child as no reason is apparent from the record. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedent. There is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Kaneeza Bano Let the applicant- involved in the aforementioned crime 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. She shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release her on bail during the trial in FIR/ Case Crime No. 441 of 2024, under section 103 (1), 85, 80, 123 of BNS and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.- Gosainganj, District - Sultanpur. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a woman and is languishing in jail since 12.12.2024. He added that the daughter-in-law as well as the son of the applicant administered the poison themselves and they were taken to the hospital where they were died. He added that the husband of the applicant took the daughter-in-law as well as the son to the hospital, wherein after some time they died. He added that there is no sign of injury over the body of the deceased as to prove that the poison was corrosively administered to them. He next added that a video of 55 seconds was prepared by some stranger and the Investigating Officer took the same and on the basis of that video, the applicant and her husband has been implicated. He added that there would be no sanctity of this video as this is not possible to prove the sanctity of those videos as it is not evident from any of the document that what was the mental status and physical condition of the deceased at the time when they stated and that was prepared by some stranger. He next submits that the son of the applicant and the daughter-in-law solemnized the marriage arise out of love marriage and the applicant and her husband were intervened in their relations though fact remains that they usually quarreled with each other. He also added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen, there is no previous criminal antecedent and she is languishing in jail since 12.12.2024 and she undertakes that in case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the FIR and the son of the applicant as well as the daughter in law died in her house. He submits that there are serious allegations against the applicant and she is not entitled for bail. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is a woman and languishing in jail since 12.12.2024. The charge sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that she would tamper the evidences. This Court has also noticed the fact that the husband of the applicant took the deceased to the hospital where they died. Except apart the video, which was recorded by some stranger, there seems to be no other evidence against the applicant and situation seems to be improbable that why a mother shall administer the poison to her own child as no reason is apparent from the record. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedent. There is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Kaneeza Bano Let the applicant- involved in the aforementioned crime 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. She shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench