Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 2451 (ALL)

Saroj v. State of U. P.

2015-08-17

KARUNA NAND BAJPAYEE

body2015
JUDGMENT Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J. Sri Surendra Tiwari Advocate has filed Parcha on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Surendra Tiwari counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. 3. Perused the record. 4. Submission of the counsel is that the applicant is the mother in law of the deceased and she never indulged in any kind of ill treatment and demand of dowry. What has been emphasized by the counsel is that there is a statement of the deceased also which was recorded in her injured condition and has been also recorded in the mobile video by the Investigating Officer. The attention was drawn to the statement of deceased Smt. Anshika Garg alias Manju which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the application. It was stated therein by the deceased that accidentally the kerosene bottle which was placed in the kitchen fell down and kerosene got sprinkled on her clothes and also on the Gas which was burning. It was because of this reason that she caught fire. It was further stated by her that her sister in law rushed on hearing the shrieks and tried to extinguish the fire and also called her mother i.e. the present applicant. It has also been submitted that thereafter she was taken to Yashoda hospital and then to Safdarganj hospital,New Delhi. It was further categorically stated by the girl that she got burnt only as a result of an unfortunate accident that took place. On a specific question of I.O. she also denied the allegation that she was ever harassed by the in laws. To the contrary the deceased had stated that every body liked her. In fact the Investigating Officer tried to drill her and put specific questions in order to? rule out the possibility that she might have been attempting to save the applicant and the accused persons for the sake of and in order to secure the future of her children. But the deceased took the same stand and did not raise any incriminating accusations against her in laws. rule out the possibility that she might have been attempting to save the applicant and the accused persons for the sake of and in order to secure the future of her children. But the deceased took the same stand and did not raise any incriminating accusations against her in laws. Counsel has further drawn the attention of the court to the summary of the history of the patient in which also the burns have been recorded as accidental burns by kerosene oil and it was also mentioned therein that allegedly the deceased was cooking on gas and she accidentally caught fire which resulted into her burns. Further submission of the counsel is that even if the details of the merit of the case are not gone into at least on a prima facie basis there is sufficient material to make out a case for bail in favour of the applicant as she is also a woman being the mother in law of the deceased. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.7.2015 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and have submitted that no dying declaration has been recorded by the Magistrate and on spot examination there are some such features found which indicate that? it is not the case of the accidental? but burnt by the accused persons and the children of the deceased have also stated that before the incident the treatment of the applicant towards the deceased was not good and she used to ill treat. 6. it is not the case of the accidental? but burnt by the accused persons and the children of the deceased have also stated that before the incident the treatment of the applicant towards the deceased was not good and she used to ill treat. 6. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant-Smt. Saroj, involved in Case Crime No.65 of 2015 u/s 498A, 306 IPC P.S. Sihani Gate District Ghaziabad be released on bail on her executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions : - (1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever. (2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date in the court and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice. 8. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail. 9. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.