Allowed

Ram Niwas S/O Bhanjan Kaulik v. State of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy Deptt of Home Govt U.P. Civil Sectt Lko

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2022/7587/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was filed by a husband accused in a dowry and culpable homicide case involving the death of his wife. The court observed the lack of specific injuries beyond ligature marks and granted bail after the accused had been in judicial custody for over two years.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding attendance, objection to adjournments, and consequences of misuse of bail.

Ram Niwas S/O Bhanjan Kaulik Vs State of U.P. Thru Addl… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7587 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Niwas S/O Bhanjan Kaulik Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy Deptt Of Home Govt U.P. Civil Sectt Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Shukla,Abhishek Mishra,Santosh Kumar Tripathi

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Ram Niwas S/o Bhanjan Kaulik seeking bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 492 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B, IPC, and section 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Rupayideeha, District Bahraich.

¶8

The accused-applicant is husband of the deceased Malti. Marriage between the accused and malti had taken place five years before the date of incident. On 13th November, 2020 father of the deceased/complainant got the information that Malti had died as a result of hanging.

¶9

A free will allegation was made that the deceased was killed by the accused-applicant and other co-accused for dowry demand, but no specific item was mentioned. The postmortem report would suggest that the deceased had died as a result of asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. Except for ligature mark, no other injury was noticed during the course of examination.

¶10

Sri Anurag Shukla, learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the deceased was not able to conceive and for this reason she used to be depressed and sad. He also submits that the deceased as well as the accused belong to rural background and in this background if a female is not able to conceive, she would usually remain depressed and sad. It is further submitted that the allegation of dowry demand and subjecting the deceased to quality, even after five years of marriage, are totally belied by any substance.These allegations have been made just to attract the offence under section 304 B IPC.

¶11

Shri Ramesh Dutt Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the bail application, but has not disputed the fact that accept for ligature mark no other injury was noticed in the postmortem report examination on the body of the deceased and there is only free will reference/allegation

¶12

regarding dowry demand by the accused-applicant and subjecting the deceased to cruelty.

¶13

The accused-applicant has been in jail since 18th November, 2020. Considering the aforesaid facts and also taking note of the fact that the accused is in jail for more than two years this court deems it appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let applicant Ram Niwas S/o Bhanjan Kaulik be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. )

¶20

Order Date :- 8.12.2022 A.Nigam

¶21

Digitally signed by ANUJ NIGAM Date: 2022.12.13 18:24:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Niwas S/O Bhanjan Kaulik v. State of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy Deptt of Home Govt U.P. Civil Sectt Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Niwas S/O Bhanjan Kaulik v. State of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy Deptt of Home Govt U.P. Civil Sectt Lko

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

Amarjeet Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Kuldeep Prajapati Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretriat Lucknow

Kripa Shankar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Shivam Chaurasia Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Others

Ram Bilash S/O Bharat Yadav (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Krishna Kumar Alias Babloo S/O Hari Karan (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.