Allowed¶9

Ravi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Feb 2022BAIL/56239/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 56239 of 2021; Allahabad High Court; Neeraj Tiwari, J.; Ravi v. State of U.P.; case crime No. 253 of 2020; Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 326 IPC; Sections 3/4 D.P. Act (Dowry Prohibition Act); P.S. Lahchura, District Jhansi; second bail application; husband-wife dispute; informant and victim-wife turned hostile; no criminal history; in custody since 24.11.2020; conditional bail; personal bond and two local sureties; Section 82 Cr.P.C. proclamation; Sections 229-A and 174-A IPC; Section 313 Cr.P.C.; cancellation of bail on witness intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Ravi to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the enumerated conditions. ¶9

Ravi Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Ravi to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the enumerated conditions.

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Ravi, in custody since 24.11.2020 in case crime No. 253 of 2020 (Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 326 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Lahchura, District Jhansi), should be released on bail.

¶9

Court's answer

The applicant Ravi was ordered to be released on bail in case crime No. 253 of 2020 on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

Bail was granted subject to conditions: (i) an undertaking not to seek adjournments on dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present; (ii) presence before the trial court on each fixed date personally or through counsel, failing which action under Section 229-A IPC; (iii) consequences under Section 174-A IPC upon failure to appear after a Section 82 Cr.P.C. proclamation; and (iv) personal presence at opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of the Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement.

¶10

Key takeaways

If the applicant intimidates or threatens any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Neeraj Tiwari, J.; order dated 14.2.2022) allowed the second bail application of Ravi in case crime No. 253 of 2020 (Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 326 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Lahchura, District Jhansi), releasing him on a personal bond and two local sureties of like amount without expressing any opinion on merits. Considerations: matrimonial (husband-wife) dispute; the informant (father-in-law) and the victim-wife had given statements in favour of the applicant before the trial Court and both were declared hostile; no criminal history; in custody since 24.11.2020. Bail subject to conditions: undertaking not to seek adjournments when witnesses are present; presence on each trial date personally or through counsel (default actionable under Section 229-A IPC); consequences under Section 174-A IPC on non-appearance after a Section 82 Cr.P.C. proclamation; personal presence at opening of case, framing of charge and Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement; liberty to the State/Prosecutor to seek cancellation of bail if any witness is intimidated or threatened.

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56239 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ravi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Niraj Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

This is second bail application.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajeshwar Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is a dispute between husband and wife. He further submitted that informant (father-in-law) and victim-wife of applicant has given statement in favour of applicant before the trial Court. It is next submitted that both the witnesses have been declared hostile by the trial Court. The applicant does not have any criminal history. There are no chances of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail from 24.11.2020 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant -Ravi, involved in case crime No. 253 of 2020, under Sections - 498-A, 323, 506, 326 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, police station -Lahchura, DistrictJhansi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:-

¶10

(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.

¶11

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on

¶12

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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

However, It is made clear that in case the applicant indulges in intimidating or threatening any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Order Date :- 14.2.2022 Sartaj

¶17

Digitally signed by SARTAJ AHMAD Date: 2022.02.14 16:53:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Haleem Sadiya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manish Kumar Singh Vs State of Up and 4 Others

Ramesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Waqf Sheikh Imami Vs Anwarul Haq

Ankush Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Stalin Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others