This judgment grants bail to an applicant accused of dowry death and cruelty. The court considered the applicant's age, health, and lack of direct evidence against him, noting he is in jail since June 2018.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 54 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30702 of 2018
Applicant :- Ram Saran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldip Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Sri Shushil Kumar Dubey, Advocate on behalf of the complainant today in the Court is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to carry out necessary corrections in the memo of application during the course of the day.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.53 of 208, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Nagla Khanger, District-Firozabad is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR was lodged by the brother of the deceased against four named accused persons including the applicant. As per FIR, the marriage of the informant's sister was solemnized with the son of the applicant in which sufficient dowry was provided but the applicant and his family members were not satisfied with the said dowry. They used to demand Rs. One lac and a motorcycle as an additional dowry from the deceased and on account of it, the deceased was being tortured till her death. There is a general burn injury over the person. The applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased aged about 63 years and is suffering from number of bodily ailments. General and generic role has been assigned to all the family members for setting the deceased ablaze. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant resides separately in distinct portion of the house. In 161 Cr.P.C. statement recorded on 27.04.2018, the informant who is not an eye witness, has only raised suspicion regarding the involvement of the present applicant in the alleged crime. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the husband of the deceased who is languishing in jail. There is no dying declaration on record. The applicant is in jail since 04.06.2018, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the age and relationship of the applicant with the deceased, nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of
the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant- Ram Saran , involved in case crime no.53 of 208, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Nagla Khanger, District-Firozabad be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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 HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 16.8.2018 Sumit S
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to enlargement on bail given his age and relationship with the deceased.
Whether the applicant has made out a case for bail considering the nature of the offence and evidence available.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Ram Saran
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
