Allowed

Ramesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Aug 2023BAIL/32968/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought bail in a murder case involving dowry death charges after serving over five years in jail. The High Court granted bail, emphasizing the prolonged incarceration and directing the trial court to conclude the trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties on conditions of appearance, non-interference, and no criminal activity.

Ramesh Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:169778

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32968 of 2019

¶4

Applicant :- Ramesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mithilesh Kumar Shukla,Avanish Kumar Shukla,Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Agrawal

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Arvind Agrawal, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 86 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 304 B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Linepar, District Firozabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and according to the FIR, marriage of the applicant was performed with the deceased about three years before and after marriage applicant tortured the deceased for want of dowry and on 3.5.2018, he committed the murder of his wife i.e. deceased.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the entire allegations of torture and demand of dowry made against the applicant are totally false and baseless and only being husband of the deceased, he has been made accused in the present matter.

¶10

He further submitted that actually it was second marriage of the deceased and some dispute arose between husband and wife and only due to this reason she committed suicide.

¶11

He further submitted that post mortem report of the deceased also suggests that she died due to hanging.

¶12

He further submitted that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 8.6.2018 i.e. for more than five years and he has already served more than 50% of the minimum sentence of seven years provided under section 304 B IPC and trial of the case, till date, could not be concluded.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that wife of the deceased died within seven years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial home and there is also allegation of demand of dowry but could not dispute the fact that as per autopsy report, deceased died due to hanging and applicant is in jail for more than five years.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

Although, applicant is husband and his wife died within seven years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial home and there is also allegation of demand of dowry but post mortem of the deceased suggests that she died due to hanging.

¶16

Further, applicant in the present matter is in jail since June, 2018 i.e. for last more than five years and trial of the case, till date, could not be concluded and applicant has already served more than 50% of the minimum sentence of seven years provided under section 304 B IPC.

¶17

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, particularly long incarceration of the applicant of more than five years, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Ramesh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶25

However, considering the fact that in the present case applicant has already served more than 50% of the minimum sentence of seven years provided under section 304B IPC, trial court is directed to conclude the trial within eight months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

¶26

Order Date :- 22.8.2023

¶27

Ankita

¶28

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajid Siddiqui Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raju Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Jugraj Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dharamveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mustkim Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others