Allahabad High Court
Ratipal vs State Of U.P. on 18 August, 2021
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- BAIL No. - 6088 of 2020
Applicant :- Ratipal
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Aziz Mansuri,Shams Vikas,V.P.Tripathi,Vishnu Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Khurseed Ahmad Khan, Advocate, who has put in appearance for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The applicant, who is father-in-law of the deceased, has prayed for bail in case crime No.0177 of 2020, under Sections- 498A, 304 B of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar.
3. Learned counsel for applicant has contended that according to the first information report, lodged by father of the deceased, it has been stated that his daughter was married with the son of the applicant and subsequent to the marriage dowry was constantly being demanded and as the applicant could not afford the same, the deceased was constantly harassed and consequently on 4-5-2020 she was killed and hanged. It has further been submitted that according to the post mortem report the death has been shown as asphyxia and shock due to anti mortem hanging. It has further come in the medical report that there was no external injury except one ligature mark on her neck. It is further submitted that only general allegations against all the family members have been leveled in the first information report and in the statements which have come up during the investigation and no specific allegation is there against anyone. It is further submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 11.6.2020 in connection with said case crime and has spent more than one year in jail.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P., (2012) 10 SCC 741 and has submitted that these facts have also been taken cognizance by the Apex Court whereby the Court stated that there are large number of false and frivolous cases lodged against the entire family members of the husband and submitted that there are general allegations against the applicant and therefore giving benefit of the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra (supra) the applicant is liable to be released on bail.
5. Learned AGA has received instructions and opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the facts as argued by the counsel for the applicant.
6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the fact that no specific role has been ascribed to the applicant being father-in-law of the deceased and also that the applicant is in judicial custody since 11.6.2020 coupled with the fact that she is entitled to the benefit of the verdict of Supreme Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra (supra) and also looking to the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Let the applicant, Ratipal, involved in case crime No.0177 of 2020, under Sections- 498A, 304 B of IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he would 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.
(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.
(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.
(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 CrPC. 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.
8. It is provided that none of the observations made above shall be considered by the trial court and the trial shall proceed on its own merits.
Order Date :- 18.8.2021
RKM.
