High Court · 2025

As per the prosecution story, the complainant in the first information report has alleged that 9 months ago, her marriage was performed with the deceased Deepu Kumar, S/o Ramdas and the family members including the present applicant used to beat the deceased and ultimately on 15- 02-2024, the father-in-law of the complainant sent the complainant to her 'Maika' and thereafter, her husband Deepu was murdered, wherein the applicant and her husband were involved in committing the offence. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant is the mother of the deceased, Deepu Kumar and she is a woman and was never involved in committing any offence. He next added that the statement of the co-accused, Ramdas is also evident that the applicant was not involved in committing any offence as it has been stated that once the deceased was murdered by him, the present applicant came out from the house and asked strangely to him that what is done. He submits that the post-mortem of the deceased is also evident that there was no cut bone injury found on the body of the injured,whereas the statement of the one of the co-accused,Ramdas is apparent that he murdered the deceased with axe. He also submitted that the role of the present applicant is distinguishable from the role of the other co- accused persons as she is a woman and has no role. Adding his arguments, he submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and she has cooperated in the investigation proceedings. He added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and she is languishing in jail since 16-03- 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. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be granted bail. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and there are specific allegations against the applicant for committing offence while being colluded with other co-accused persons. He submits that the Investigating OfÏcer, after thorough investigation, found that there is specific role of the applicant and she was also involved in disposing of the dead body of the deceased and as such, she is not entitled for bail. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that though the applicant is named in the first information report, but, the statement of the co-accused, Ramdas, who seems to be the main accused is evident that the applicant has role of helping for disposing of the dead body of the deceased. Further the post-mortem report is also evident that there is no cut bone found and 'Viscera' is preserved prior to one year, but, there is still not any report of the Forensic Science Laboratory. This court has also noticed that the applicant is a woman and she has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 16-03-2024 coupled with the fact that she has undertaken that if she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, 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. Let the applicant-Vimla Devi @ Sunita Devi 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 sufÏcient 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.; (4) 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. 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 him, 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 :- 25.7.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

As per the prosecution story, the complainant in the first information report has alleged that 9 months ago, her marriage was performed with the deceased Deepu Kumar, S/o Ramdas and the family members including the present applicant used to beat the deceased and ultimately on 15- 02-2024, the father-in-law of the complainant sent the complainant to her 'Maika' and thereafter, her husband Deepu was murdered, wherein the applicant and her husband were involved in committing the offence. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant is the mother of the deceased, Deepu Kumar and she is a woman and was never involved in committing any offence. He next added that the statement of the co-accused, Ramdas is also evident that the applicant was not involved in committing any offence as it has been stated that once the deceased was murdered by him, the present applicant came out from the house and asked strangely to him that what is done. He submits that the post-mortem of the deceased is also evident that there was no cut bone injury found on the body of the injured,whereas the statement of the one of the co-accused,Ramdas is apparent that he murdered the deceased with axe. He also submitted that the role of the present applicant is distinguishable from the role of the other co- accused persons as she is a woman and has no role. Adding his arguments, he submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and she has cooperated in the investigation proceedings. He added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and she is languishing in jail since 16-03- 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. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be granted bail. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and there are specific allegations against the applicant for committing offence while being colluded with other co-accused persons. He submits that the Investigating OfÏcer, after thorough investigation, found that there is specific role of the applicant and she was also involved in disposing of the dead body of the deceased and as such, she is not entitled for bail. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that though the applicant is named in the first information report, but, the statement of the co-accused, Ramdas, who seems to be the main accused is evident that the applicant has role of helping for disposing of the dead body of the deceased. Further the post-mortem report is also evident that there is no cut bone found and 'Viscera' is preserved prior to one year, but, there is still not any report of the Forensic Science Laboratory. This court has also noticed that the applicant is a woman and she has no previous criminal history and is languishing in jail since 16-03-2024 coupled with the fact that she has undertaken that if she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, 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. Let the applicant-Vimla Devi @ Sunita Devi 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 sufÏcient 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.; (4) 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. 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 him, 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 :- 25.7.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench