Allowed

Ramratan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Jan 2021BAIL/4524/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to an applicant implicated in a dowry-death case under Sections 498-A/304-B IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court referred to legal precedents and directed release subject to a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Ramratan be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, subject to conditions of attending trial, not tampering with witnesses, and refraining from illegal

Ramratan Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 90

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4524 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ramratan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 69 of 2020, under sections 498-A/304-B IPC, and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Dakore, District Jalaun and is in jail since 14.10.2020, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant about the death of her daughter who was married with Ajay on 09.07.2019. It was alleged in the first information report that the accused persons were demanding dowry from the deceased and it was further alleged in the first information report that accused persons gave poison to the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present accused is father-in-law of the deceased and general allegation of demand of dowry was mentioned in the first information report. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present accused is quite innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the deceased has died due to consumption of salfass and was admitted by her husband and treatment was provided thereafter she was referred to Jhansi Medical College where she has died. The brother of the deceased was witness of Panchayatnama and this report was lodged after 15 days of the incident after due deliberation.

¶8

He lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 14.10.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity

¶11

of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018(3) SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶12

Let the applicant, Ramratan involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶14

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶15

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶16

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶17

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

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with 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.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 27.1.2021 Vikram

Ramratan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramratan 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mantosh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Anshul Vs State of U.P.

Jubaier Vs State of U.P.

Champa Devi Vs State of U.P.

Vidhya Devi Vs State of U.P.

Mahesh Pandey Vs State of U.P.