Allowed

Ramvilas v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2021BAIL/40992/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by Ramvilas during trial in a case involving 498A, 304B IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The court considered the applicant's status as father-in-law, separation from the deceased, and lack of tampering risk before granting bail with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail in a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions including not tampering with evidence, appearing in court, and not seeking adjournments during evidence recording.

Ramvilas Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40992 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ramvilas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narayan Singh(Kushwaha) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Narayan Singh(Kushwaha), learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.B. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Ramvilas, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 93 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Nayagaon, District- Etah.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. It is argued that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons. It is argued that the husband of the deceased has been arrested and is in jail. It is argued that the deceased committed suicide and cause of death as opined by the doctor is asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. It is further argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case only being the family member of the husband of the deceased. It is argued that the applicant was living separately from the deceased and her husband in the adjoining house. It is also argued that mother-in-law of the deceased namely Smt. Rama, has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.11.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 41756 of 2021, copy of which has been produced before the Court which is taken on record. It is argued that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 09.8.2021.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments as raised.

¶9

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant- Ramvilas, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:-

¶11

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶12

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶14

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., 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, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

¶15

(V) 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶16

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶17

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶18

The bail application is allowed.

¶19

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 2.12.2021 Naresh

Ramvilas v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramvilas 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

Ajay Pratap Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikrant Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kusuma Vs State of U.P.

Gautam Vs State of U.P.

Rukmudeen Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Archana and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others