High Court · 2025

1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Shyamendra Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant, Shri Anil Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the complainant and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 02.06.2025 in Case Crime no. 105 of 2025 u/s 80(2), 85, 92 B.N.S., 2023 & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, P.S. Sadarpur, District Sitapur. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged.

4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 29.5.2025 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 30.5.2025 levelling allegation against five accused persons including the present applicant. The present applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and she was having cordial relation with her daughter-in-law and she never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. As per the postmortem report there is one antemortem injury i.e. contusion 13.0cmx5.0cm present on left side lower abdomen, just above left illiac crest and cause of death is shock and hemorrhage. As per the statement of the independent witness which has been shown by the learned AGA wherein it has been indicated that the deceased was pregnant of nine months and on account of severe complication her husband namely Jaswant Singh took her to hospital where she died during treatment. The present applicant is absolutely unaware about the reason of cause of death. The present applicant has no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. In this case investigation is going on and the counsel for the applicant extends an undertaking on behalf of the applicant that if she is released on bail, she shall cooperate in the investigation.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted. He has further submitted that similar allegations have been levelled against one co-accused, namely-Vijay Kumar @ Vijayi who happens to be Mausia-Sasur of the deceased and has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6214 of 2025. Since the allegations are similar, therefore, the present applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on principles of parity. He has further submitted that the present applicant is a lady, therefore, benefit of Section 480 of B.N.S.S., 2023 may be extended to her.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned Counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the victim died while she was pregnant of 9 month and all accused persons have tortured her on account of injuries caused by the accused persons, the deceased succumbed to death but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the date of incident has been indicated as 29.5.2025 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 30.5.2025, present applicant is mother-in-law and she was having cordial relation with her daughter-in-law and she never demanded any dowry from her or her family member and as per the postmortem report there is one antemortem injury and cause of death is shock and hemorrhage, in the statement of independent witness it has been indicated that the deceased was pregnant of nine months and on account of severe complication her husband namely Jaswant Singh took her to hospital where she died during treatment, applicant has not demanded any dowry from her or her family members, applicant has no criminal history of any kind whatsoever, in this case investigation is going on and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

8. Bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant Smudri (In F.I.R. Samundri), involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 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 his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.may be issued and if 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (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. 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. Order Date :- 29.7.2025 -Piyush- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Shyamendra Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant, Shri Anil Kumar Singh, learned Counsel for the complainant and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 02.06.2025 in Case Crime no. 105 of 2025 u/s 80(2), 85, 92 B.N.S., 2023 & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, P.S. Sadarpur, District Sitapur. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged.

4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 29.5.2025 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 30.5.2025 levelling allegation against five accused persons including the present applicant. The present applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and she was having cordial relation with her daughter-in-law and she never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. As per the postmortem report there is one antemortem injury i.e. contusion 13.0cmx5.0cm present on left side lower abdomen, just above left illiac crest and cause of death is shock and hemorrhage. As per the statement of the independent witness which has been shown by the learned AGA wherein it has been indicated that the deceased was pregnant of nine months and on account of severe complication her husband namely Jaswant Singh took her to hospital where she died during treatment. The present applicant is absolutely unaware about the reason of cause of death. The present applicant has no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. In this case investigation is going on and the counsel for the applicant extends an undertaking on behalf of the applicant that if she is released on bail, she shall cooperate in the investigation.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted. He has further submitted that similar allegations have been levelled against one co-accused, namely-Vijay Kumar @ Vijayi who happens to be Mausia-Sasur of the deceased and has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 14.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6214 of 2025. Since the allegations are similar, therefore, the present applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on principles of parity. He has further submitted that the present applicant is a lady, therefore, benefit of Section 480 of B.N.S.S., 2023 may be extended to her.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned Counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the victim died while she was pregnant of 9 month and all accused persons have tortured her on account of injuries caused by the accused persons, the deceased succumbed to death but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the date of incident has been indicated as 29.5.2025 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 30.5.2025, present applicant is mother-in-law and she was having cordial relation with her daughter-in-law and she never demanded any dowry from her or her family member and as per the postmortem report there is one antemortem injury and cause of death is shock and hemorrhage, in the statement of independent witness it has been indicated that the deceased was pregnant of nine months and on account of severe complication her husband namely Jaswant Singh took her to hospital where she died during treatment, applicant has not demanded any dowry from her or her family members, applicant has no criminal history of any kind whatsoever, in this case investigation is going on and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

8. Bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant Smudri (In F.I.R. Samundri), involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 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 his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.may be issued and if 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (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. 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned. Order Date :- 29.7.2025 -Piyush- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench