Single judge granted bail to senior citizen father and mother-in-law accused of dowry death, ruling prima facie case made out despite FIR allegations. Court imposed strict conditions regarding court attendance.
Granted bail, releasing applicants on personal bond and two local sureties subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance.
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. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4319 of 2021
Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Upadhyay, Upendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Dhirendra Kumar Verma
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 1273 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 304B of IPC and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act, Police Station Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The report of this incident was lodged by the complainant Pyare Lal against six accused persons namely Akash (husband of the deceased), Rajendra (father-in-law of the deceased), Meena (mother-in-law of the deceased), Bawi (Jeth of the deceased), Vishal (Dewar of the deceased) and Priya (Jethani of the deceased). It has been alleged in the first information report that the in-laws of the deceased were demanding five lakhs of rupees from the parents of the deceased and since the additional demand of dowry was not fulfilled, the in-laws of the deceased had done her to death on 21.08.2020.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicant No. 1 is the father-in-law of the deceased and the applicant No. 2 is mother-in-law of the deceased. Applicant No. 1 is 68 years old and applicant No. 2 is 62 years old, both are senior citizens. It is further submitted that there are general allegations in the First Information Report and the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging. It is also submitted that both the applicants were living at Farrukhabad and the deceased was living with their son at Kanpur. Lastly, it is argued that the applicants are in jail since 19.10.2020 and that in case applicants are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicants - Rajendra Kumar and Smt. Meena involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(1). The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;
(2). The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;
(3). In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(4). The applicants 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of their bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 21.1.2021 LBY
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a prima facie case for bail is made out for senior citizen applicants falsely implicated in dowry death charges.
Whether the accused-applicants will misuse the liberty of bail.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Rajendra Kumar
Meena
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
