Allowed

Ramji Lal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Oct 2020BAIL/20906/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant, Ramji Lal, accused under 498A and 304B IPC for dowry death. Holding that prima facie evidence was lacking and apprehension of tampering existed, the court granted bail with strict conditions requiring sureties, passport surrender, and personal appearance at trial stages.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1 lac with two sureties in the like amount, subject to specified conditions of appearance and surrender of passport.

Ramji Lal Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20906 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Ramji Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Ali Imam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant states that he could not file the duly sworn affidavit of the deponent, certified copy of the impugned bail rejection order dated 16.6.2020 as well as certified copy of the F.I.R. and prays for exemption. The exemption application is allowed.

¶6

Heard Sri Syed Ali Imam, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned Brief Holder appearing appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case.The marriage between the deceased and son the applicant, namely, Ravindra was solemnized five years prior to the incident. He further argued that cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. As per the inquest report as well as post mortem report, there was no mark of injury found on the person of the deceased which itself belies the prosecution version that forcibly poison was administered to the deceased by her in-laws. No incriminating article has been recovered either at the pointing out of the applicant or from his possession. There is no dying declaration against the applicant nor there is any eye witness account of the incident. The husband of the deceased, namely, Ravindra is already in jail. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent. The applicant is in jail since 16.12.2019.

¶8

Learned Brief Holder appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶10

Let the applicant- Ramji Lal . involved in Case Crime No.338 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dibaee, District Bulandshahr be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.one lac with two sureties (one should be of his family member) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned and the court concerned shall take an undertaking from the sureties that the properties movable/immovable which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them during the pendency of the trial with the following conditions:-

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(v) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, before the trial court & shall furnish an undertaking not to leave the country until permission is obtained by him from this Court or till the conclusion of the trial.

¶16

The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the co-accused

¶17

Ravindra

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶19

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶20

Order Date :- 7.10.2020

¶21

¶22

Digitally signed by Justice Ramesh Sinha Date: 2020.10.08 13:40:42 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramji Lal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramji Lal 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

Ankush Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babalu Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Baburam Vs State of U.P.

Sanjeev Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Baksharaj Pasi Vs State of U.P.