In a bail application under Sections 498A and 323 IPC, the High Court released the applicant on bail after considering parity with co-accused and an undertaking from defense counsel.
Release on bail with personal bond and two local sureties, subject to conditions regarding appearance in court and attending framing of charge.
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. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46970 of 2019
Applicant :- Adalat Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sati Shanker Tripathi,Devid Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jai Prakash Singh,Raj Kiran Chaudhary
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ashish Pandey, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Sati Shanker Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Lalji Maurya, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Adalat Yadav with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 712 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 506, 325 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Badagaon, District- Varanasi , during pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present first information report has been lodged by the victim against as many as nine accused persons that is entire family members including the husband (applicant), mother-in-law, father-in-law, two brother-in-law (Jeth), two sister-in-law (Jethani), sister-in-law (Nanad) and brother-in-law (Devar) with the allegations that for additional dowry demand, the victim was badly beaten by the applicant as wll as other family members. She has also alleged that the co-accused Tej Bahadur @ Teju Yadav, who is Jeth of the victim has committed rape upon her whereas no specific role has been to the applicant for causing injury to the victim. It is further argued that there are general allegation against all the accused persons for beating the victim. As per the injury report, though the injuries are there but the same has not been specified as to who has caused the said injury. It is further argued that the co-accused persons, namely, Natthu Yadav and Durgawati @ Chetna Devi having similar role have been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.09.2019 passed in Cri. Misc. Bail Application Nos. 40829 of 2019 and 40834 of 2019 respectively, copy of which order has been appended as Annexure No. 6 of the affidavit accompanying the bail application, hence the applicant is also entitled for bail on the
ground of parity. The applicant has no criminal history except the present case and is languishing in jail since 02.09.2019. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail they will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. 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 him in accordance with law.
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.
Order Date :- 14.11.2019 JK Yadav
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be granted bail in a case involving dowry-related allegations under Sections 498A and 323 IPC.
What conditions should be imposed on the applicant to ensure his presence during the trial and prevent misuse of bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P.Referred¶10
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Adalat Yadav
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Manju Rani Chauhan
Parties & counsel
