Allowed

Ram Sajivan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Dec 2019BAIL/47928/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 47928 of 2019, Court No. 68 granted bail to Ram Sajivan, father-in-law of the deceased, in a case under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC, and 3/4 D.P. Act. The court imposed conditions regarding tampering of evidence or intimidation of witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties under specified conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence and intimidation of witnesses.

Ram Sajivan Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47928 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Sajivan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hariom Singh,Virendra Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arunesh Khare

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the deceased. It has further been submitted that there is general allegation against the applicant, no specific role has been assigned to the applicant. The deceased sustained burn injury while she was cooking food. The applicant and co -accused Phool Chandra took her to District Hospital Hamirpur for treatment from where she was referred to Medical College Kanpur but unfortunately, she died on the way. There is no dying declaration of the deceased. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of the husband of the deceased. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 6.5.2019.

¶7

Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the deceased died an unnatural death within 3 years of her marriage due to burn injury. Prior to the alleged incident the deceased was harassed and tortured by the applicant. The applicant has committed the alleged offence, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶8

Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.

¶9

Let the applicant Ram Sajivan involved in Case Crime No. 55 of 2019 (S.T.No. 96 of 2019), under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station Sisolar District Hamirpur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court

¶10

concerned with the following conditions;

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.

¶12

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and he will cooperate with the trial.

¶13

The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

¶14

In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶15

Order Date :- 11.12.2019

¶16

Gss

Ram Sajivan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sajivan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Nafeesa Vs State of U.P.

Neetu Vs State of U.P.

Amit @ Sonu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Shri Ram Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Sumit Yadav @ Monu Vs State of U.P.