Single judge granted bail during trial to applicant charged with dowry death and miscellaneous offences, noting half the minimum sentence period had elapsed.
Released on personal bond and two sureties in like amount subject to specific conditions attending court and not intimidating witnesses.
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. - 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36862 of 2015
Applicant :- Nishant Ram @ Sant Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U. P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakant Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J.
By means of this application under Section 439(1) Cr.P.C., the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 241 of 2014, under sections 498A, 304B, 201 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Rohaniya, district-Varanasi and is in jail since 27.6.2014, is seeking bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the marriage between the deceased Babita and the applicant was solemnized on 21.5.2013. She died on 7.6.2014 due to snakebite. The applicant is a truck driver. He comes from a marginal section of the society and lives in a hut. He next submitted that there is no allegation of demand of dowry against the applicant and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.
It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 27.6.2014 and in view of Section 436(A) Cr.P.C., he is entitled to be released on bail as more than half period of minimum punishment under Section 304B I.P.C. has already been undergone by him in jail. For the trial purposes though the prosecution has cited nine witnesses in support of its case but only two witnesses have been examined so far, therefore, there is no hope of the trial being concluded in foreseeable future. It is lastly urged by the learned counsel that the applicant that the applicant has no criminal antecedents.
The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.
Having regard to nature of offence and totality of circumstances mentioned above, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Let the applicant, Nishant Ram @ Sant Kumar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in Case Crime No. 241 of 2014, under sections 498A, 304B, 201 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Rohaniya, district-Varanasi subject to the following conditions:-
(a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by him.
(b) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 16.2.2018 Faridul
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail during the pendency of the trial given the nature of the offence and circumstances.
Whether the applicant满足 the conditions under Section 436(A) Cr.P.C. for bail after undergoing more than half the minimum punishment period.
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Nishant Ram @ Sant Kumar
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
