Allowed

Radha Devi and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2021BAIL/5519/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under 498A, 304B IPC and Dowry Penalty Act regarding a dowry death, the court allowed bail. Due to extraordinary circumstances, the initial grant was on personal bond without sureties until normal court functioning was restored.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing personal bond without sureties until normal court functioning is restored; two sureties to be furnished within one month thereafter.

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

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5519 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Radha Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shivajee Srivastava,Shrikant Singh Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicants who are involved in case crime no.24 of 2020, under Section 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Bahariabad, DistrictGhazipur are seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶8

Submission made by learned counsel for the applicants is that the FIR was got registered by Smt. Anita Devi on 06.04.2020 under the aforesaid sections of IPC against the husband and all his family members attributing general role of harassment. The special feature of the FIR is that cursory reference of unspecified amount of additional dowry has been mentioned and on which it was alleged that she was done to death under the mysterious circumstances. There was no earlier complaint or report against the applicants in this regard. There is no injury over the person and in the viscera report, Organo-chloro Insecticide was detected. The marriage was solemnized about four years back and there was unspecified amount of money as an additional dowry. The other witnesses have stated that she has committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance on account of bad habit of her husband who was habitual drinker and used to misbehave with her in the stage of intoxication. The applicants are languishing in jail since 28.09.2020.

¶9

Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Taking into account the totality of circumstances and special reference that there was tangent remark of additional dowry only, and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicants have made out a case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicants, Radha Devi and Mahesh Ram , who are involved in case crime no.24 of 2020, under Section 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police StationBahariabad, District-Ghazipur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) THE APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY 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.

¶13

(ii) 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 IPC.

¶14

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANTS MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE THEIR PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANTS FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶15

(iv) THE APPLICANTS 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 APPLICANTS ARE 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 THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶16

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANTS.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶20

The applicants shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶21

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶22

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 1.2.2021 Sumit S

Radha Devi and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radha Devi and Another 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

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Ahirwar Alias Siddharth Ahirwar Vs State of U.P.

Ikrar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Maitun Nisha Vs State of U.P.

Parmanand Mourya Vs State of U.P.

Shohan Vs State of U.P.