Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40074 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3584 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Suman Devi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Prakash,Arsh Bugga Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Smt. Suman Devi) is languishing in jail since 23.12.2024 in Case Crime No.589 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80 (2) & 123 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Maholi, District-Sitapur. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as she has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.). 4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. which has been lodged on 10.12.2024 for the incident dated 02.10.2024 without explaining the delay. The general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicant. So as to implicate the entire family, the present applicant who is mother-in-law, has been implicated in this case. No specific role has been attributed to the present applicant. Since cause of death could not be ascertained, therefore, Viscera was preserved and the Viscera report is still awaited. The present applicant was having cordial relation with her daughter-in-law (since deceased) and she has never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. She has nothing to do with the family affair of her son or his wife. There might be some scuffle between the husband and wife but she is not aware of such scuffle. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge-sheet has been filed. He undertakes on behalf of the present applicant that she shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order. Besides, being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S. 6. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, she is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that there is delay in lodging the impugned F.I.R. inasmuch as the incident is of 02.10.2024 whereas the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on 10.12.2024 without explaining such delay; the general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicant; no specific role has been attributed to the present applicant; the cause of death could not be ascertained therefore, Viscera was preserved and Viscera report is still awaited; the present applicant was having cordial relation with her daughter-in-law (since deceased); she has never demanded any dowry from her daughter-in-law (since deceased) or her family member; the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the charge- sheet has been filed and the undertaking that she shall co- operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; the fact that she being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C./480 B.N.S.S, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant (Smt. Suman Devi) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (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 her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and 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 IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (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./351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. 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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench