Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(ALL) 19636
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
NOORJAHAN – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
BAIL/40007/2022
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail
Headnote
BAIL - DOWRY DEATH - MOTHER-IN-LAW - INVOLVEMENT IN OFFENCE - DYING DECLARATION - INTERPRETATION - SECTION 32 OF INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, Noorjahan, was accused of setting fire to her daughter-in-law, leading to her death, for dowry. The prosecution relied on the dying declaration of the deceased, which implicated the applicant. The applicant denied involvement and claimed that the dying declaration was unreliable as the victim had survived for 45 days after recording it.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dying declaration clearly implicated the applicant in the offence and that it was recorded promptly without any allegations of tutoring. The court also noted that the applicant had been assigned a role in the dying declaration and that the trial was ongoing.
Issues: 1. Whether the dying declaration was admissible and reliable. 2. Whether the applicant was involved in the offence as alleged in the dying declaration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the dying declaration was admissible and reliable as it was recorded promptly and there were no allegations of tutoring. The court also found that the applicant had been assigned a role in the dying declaration and that the trial was ongoing. Therefore, the court found that it was not a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail application and directed the trial court to proceed with the trial and reach a logical conclusion expeditiously, within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
- The court examined the admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration, concluding that it was recorded promptly and without allegations of tutoring, thus making it admissible and trustworthy (!) (!) .
- The court found that the dying declaration implicated the applicant in the offence and assigned her a role in its recording, which supported the prosecution’s case (!) .
- The court emphasized that the trial was ongoing, and the applicant had been in custody since 22.07.2021 (!) .
- The applicant's counsel argued that she was falsely implicated and that her role was limited to catching hold of the victim, suggesting her involvement was minimal (!) (!) .
- The prosecution opposed bail, citing the clear involvement of the applicant in the offence as indicated by the dying declaration, and confirmed that it was recorded promptly and without tutoring (!) (!) .
- The court held that, given the evidence and ongoing trial, the case was not suitable for granting bail at this stage (!) .
- The court dismissed the bail application, directing the trial court to proceed and conclude the trial within one year from the production of a certified copy of the order (!) (!) .
- The observations made were limited to the facts relevant to the bail application and should not influence the merits of the case during trial (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance.
Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40007
of 2022
Applicant :- Noorjahan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manvendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
List has been revised.
Heard Sri P.K. Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Harish
Pratap Singh, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Vibhav
Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in
Crime No.141 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC & 3/4
Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Hathgaon, District
Fatehpur with the prayer to enlarge her on bail.
As per prosecution story, the applicant, who happens to be the
mother-in-law of the deceased person, alongwith other co-
accused persons are said to have set to fire the deceased person
for a demand of dowry on 09.12.2020.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is
the mother-in-law of the deceased person and has been falsely
implicated in the present case. She has nothing to do with the
said offence. The complete treatment has been undertaken by
the husband of the deceased person Rizwan and it was he who
had rushed her to the hospital after hearing the shrieks of the
deceased person. Learned counsel has further stated that there is
a dying declaration of the deceased person, which indicates the
involvement of the applicant but the same cannot be relied as
the victim had survived about 45 days after the recording of the
dying declaration. Learned counsel has further stated that the
ingredients of Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act are not
fulfilled. The role of the applicant is of catching hold only. The
case of the applicant is at a different footing to the co-accused
person Rizwan. There is no criminal history of the applicant.
The applicant is in jail since 22.07.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail
application on the ground that the dying declaration
categorically indicates the involvement of the applicant in the
offence and the said dying declaration has been recorded
promptly and there is no allegations of any tutoring to the
deceased person which is clear and unambiguous.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through
the records particularly the dying declaration and as the
applicant has been assigned the role in the said dying
declaration, and the fact that the trial is going on, I do not find it
a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
The bail application is found devoid of merits and is,
accordingly, dismissed.
However, it is directed that the court below may proceed with
the trial and reach at the logical conclusion expeditiously, if
there is no legal impediment, within a period of one year from
the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to
the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of
bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing
on the merits of the case during trial.
Order Date :- 9.1.2023
Ravi Kant
Digitally signed by :-
RAVI KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
