This court granted bail to the applicant, husband of the deceased in a dowry-death trial. Despite prosecution opposition, the court found it a fit case for bail, imposing strict conditions to secure presence and prevent abuse of liberty.
Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of attendance and prosecution.
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. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50422 of 2022
Applicant :- Harihar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saroj Kumar Dubey,Ashok Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard Sri S.K. Dubey, and Sri A.K. Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 37 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Bankata, District Deoria.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is husband of the deceased and he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per prosecution case, the deceased was sitting near the heater and due to some negligence the saree of the deceased took fire as result of which she sustained burn injury. It has further submitted that after receiving the burn injury, the applicant taken the deceased in the hospital and later on, during treatment, she died. The information regarding such incident was also given by the applicant to the first informant and his family members. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. It has further submitted that at the time of the panchyatnama and cremation of the deceased, the applicant and his family members were present. It has further submitted that at present trial is going on and the statements of P.W. 1 Nandu Yadav (father of the deceased), P.W. 2 Kalindi Devi (mother-in-law of the deceased), P.W. 3 Videshi Yadav (grand father of the deceased) has been recorded in which they have not supported the prosecution version. It has further submitted that co-accused Madan, who is father-in-law of the deceased has already been granted the bail by another bench of this Court vide order dated 1.12.2021 in criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 37821 of 2021, therefore the applicant is also entitled for bail. No offence is made out against the applicant. He has further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 8.3.2021.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Harihar Yadav , who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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.
(i) 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.
(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 IPC.
(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., 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 IPC.
(iv) 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.
(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 applicant.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
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.
Order Date :- 15.11.2022 A.
Digitally signed by AFAQ AHMAD Date: 2022.11.15 13:23:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. given he is the husband of the deceased in a dowry-death case.
Whether the failure of co-accused to support the prosecution version affects the bail application.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 37821 of 2021Referred¶7
7 provisions across 3 enactments
Harihar Yadav
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
