High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anant Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Ashutosh Bajpai, learned counsel, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant/ informant. The same is taken on record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed the supplementary affidavit, today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Yashoda Devi) is languishing in jail since 29.05.2025 in Case Crime No.109 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80 (2), 115 (2) & 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District- Bahraich.

4.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).

5. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the general allegation of beating and assault has been attributed to all the accused persons including the present applicant. Except the present applicant, three accused persons are, husband, father-in-law and brother-in-law (Devar) of the victim (since deceased). All the persons have assaulted the victim mercilessly inasmuch as the deceased received as many as ten serious bodily injuries.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that so far as her role is concerned, she has not committed any offence as she was not capable to commit such offence inasmuch as she has been suffering from paralysis in the last couple of years. Annexure No.12 is her medical examination being conducted from the Government Hospital, District-Bahraich. The police team had took her to the medical expert for the medical examination. As per medical examination report, the present applicant has been suffering from old history of paralysis (Quadriplegia). The Quadriplegia, as per the Google information, is a paralysis that affects the ability to voluntarily move the upper and lower body as such information has been annexed as Annexure No.SA-2. Therefore, looking into the medical condition of the present applicant and the fact that she is an old aged lady of 65 years, she may be granted bail.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge-sheet has been filed and she undertakes that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order. Besides, being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S.

8. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel for the informant have, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the accused persons have beaten the victim mercilessly, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for bail, but they could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the medical condition of the present applicant and the fact that she is an old aged lady of 65 years; general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicant; no specific role has been attributed to the present applicant; the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; the fact that she being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case.

10. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant (Yashoda Devi) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) 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. 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) 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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) 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./351 of B.N.S.S., 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 her in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

12. It is made clear that the bail has been granted to the present applicant in the peculiar facts and circumstances that she is suffering from paralysis and is an old aged lady of 65 years, therefore, other accused persons may not claim parity with the present applicant. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 2.7.2025 Suresh/ SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anant Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Ashutosh Bajpai, learned counsel, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant/ informant. The same is taken on record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed the supplementary affidavit, today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Yashoda Devi) is languishing in jail since 29.05.2025 in Case Crime No.109 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80 (2), 115 (2) & 352 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District- Bahraich.

4.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).

5. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the general allegation of beating and assault has been attributed to all the accused persons including the present applicant. Except the present applicant, three accused persons are, husband, father-in-law and brother-in-law (Devar) of the victim (since deceased). All the persons have assaulted the victim mercilessly inasmuch as the deceased received as many as ten serious bodily injuries.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that so far as her role is concerned, she has not committed any offence as she was not capable to commit such offence inasmuch as she has been suffering from paralysis in the last couple of years. Annexure No.12 is her medical examination being conducted from the Government Hospital, District-Bahraich. The police team had took her to the medical expert for the medical examination. As per medical examination report, the present applicant has been suffering from old history of paralysis (Quadriplegia). The Quadriplegia, as per the Google information, is a paralysis that affects the ability to voluntarily move the upper and lower body as such information has been annexed as Annexure No.SA-2. Therefore, looking into the medical condition of the present applicant and the fact that she is an old aged lady of 65 years, she may be granted bail.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge-sheet has been filed and she undertakes that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order. Besides, being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S.

8. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel for the informant have, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the accused persons have beaten the victim mercilessly, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for bail, but they could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the medical condition of the present applicant and the fact that she is an old aged lady of 65 years; general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicant; no specific role has been attributed to the present applicant; the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; the fact that she being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case.

10. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

11. Let the applicant (Yashoda Devi) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) 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. 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 her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) 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./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) 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./351 of B.N.S.S., 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 her in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

12. It is made clear that the bail has been granted to the present applicant in the peculiar facts and circumstances that she is suffering from paralysis and is an old aged lady of 65 years, therefore, other accused persons may not claim parity with the present applicant. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 2.7.2025 Suresh/ SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench