Allowed

Totaram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 Nov 2023BAIL/47049/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the court considered allegations of biginy and dowry death. After hearing counsel and noting the absence of tampering risk, the court granted bail with strict conditions to ensure trial attendance and prevent harassment.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties upon compliance with conditions prohibiting tampering and ensuring court attendance.

Totaram Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:218752

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47049 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Totaram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Bharat Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Totaram, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 84 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at Police Station Bilsi, District Budaun.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. It is argued that the general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant. The marriage of the deceased Lakshmi was solemnized with Dinesh Kumar the son of the applicant nine months ago. It is argued that the deceased was being given treatment by the informant and she died during treatment after which she was cremated without conducting her postmortem. Dinesh Kumar the husband of the deceased is in jail. It is argued that co-accused Smt. Urmila the mother-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.10.2023 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 42927 of 2023 (Urmila Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order has been produced before the Court which is taken on record. It is further argued that the investigation concluded and charge sheet sheet has been submitted against the applicant and as such there are no chances of the applicant tampering with evidence. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 35 of the affidavit and is in jail since 19.06.2023.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the First Information Report and there are allegations against him.

¶11

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The deceased was being given treatment by her father but she died and then was cremated without getting the postmortem conducted. Dinesh Kumar the husband of the deceased is in jail.

¶12

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Let the applicant Totaram , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶15

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

(iii) 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.

¶17

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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 I.P.C.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of

¶19

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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶20

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶21

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶22

The bail application is allowed .

¶23

Order Date :- 17.11.2023 M. ARIF

¶24

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Totaram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Totaram 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Phool Chandra Alias Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Saurabh Patel Vs State of U.P.

Satish Vs State of U.P.

Shubham and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Asha Vs State of U.P.

Rishi Ram Urf Rishi Ram Vs State of U.P.