Allowed

Ramji Prasad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Jul 2022BAIL/6223/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to an old and ailing applicant, Ramji Prasad, accused of dowry-related offences and culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The court imposed strict conditions including personal attendance and prohibition of seeking adjournments, directed expedited trial within six months, and reserved final merit.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond, two sureties, and compliance with strict attendance and non-adjournment conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6223 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ramji Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the applicant the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased and he is an old and ailing person. Due to father-in-law of the deceased he has been falsely implicated in this case. No allegation of demand of dowry was made against the applicant. He had no concern of the so called demand and he was not beneficiary of the same. Nothing wrong has been done by him. There is no legal evidence against the applicant. .Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.10.2020. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of

¶9

Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Ramji Prasad involved in Case Crime No.595 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶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

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

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶17

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶18

Order Date :- 21.7.2022 Dev/-

¶19

Digitally signed by DEV PRAKASH Date: 2022.07.25 13:21:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramji Prasad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramji Prasad 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandra Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Surjeet Singh @ Sameer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Lala @ Gorav Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Nilesh Alias Vakeel Vs State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Sachin Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.