Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:181233 Court No. - 6 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38488 of 2024 Applicant :- Jameela @ Jameela Khatun Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shamasul Eslam Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

Matter is taken up in the revised call.

By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.219 of 2024 at Police Station-Rasra, District-Ballia under Sections 306, 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The applicant is in jail since 28.06.2024.

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 19.09.2024.

The following arguments made by Sri Manoj Yadav, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Shamasul Eslam, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Chandan Agrawal, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicants for grant of bail:

1. The applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased.

2. The applicant never harassed the deceased or demanded dowry.

3. The applicant never interfered in the marital affairs of the deceased and her husband.

4. The deceased was a temperamental lady who was prone to extreme reactions over trivial issues.

5. On the fateful day, after a minor altercation with the member of the household, the deceased flew into a fit of rage and took the extreme step of ending her life. She committed suicide by hanging.

6. The post mortem report opines that the cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging.

7. Injuries depicted in the post mortem report consistent with hanging are:

(i). Nature of ligature mark.

(ii). The hyoid bone was found to be intact.

8. The applicant did not abet or instigate the deceased to commit suicide.

9. The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

10. The applicant is not flight risk. The applicant being law abiding citizen have always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to join the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

Learned AGA contends that the applicant has a criminal history of one more case. Rejoining this issue, learned counsels on behalf of the applicant contend that he does not have an effective pairokar. Hence, details of the case could not be obtained and stated in the bail application. However, relying on the records available with the learned AGA and the instructions received from his client, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was falsely nominated in the said case. The said case pertains to a matrimonial dispute. The said case does not depict commission of heinous crime and has no bearing on the instant bail application.

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant-Jameela @ Jameela Khatun be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

(iii) The learned trial court is directed to fix the sureties after due application of mind in light of the judgement rendered by this Court in Arvind Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. (Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2023).

The learned trial court shall ensure that the right of bail of the applicant granted by this Court is not frustrated by arbitrary demands of sureties or onerous conditions which are unrelated to the socioeconomic status of the applicant.

Order Date :- 19.11.2024 Ashish Tripathi

Digitally signed by :-

ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI

High Court of Judicature at All