Allahabad High Court
Shivraj vs State Of U.P. on 26 July, 2021
Bench: Manish Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 32
Case :- BAIL No. - 7502 of 2021
Applicant :- Shivraj
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records.
2.The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case Crime No.77 of 2021 under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.PC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Ramgaon, District-Bahraich.
3.According to the version of the first information report lodged by father of the deceased, it is stated that there was demand of dowry from the applicant (father-in-law of the deceased) and his family members and the deceased prior to her death was abused and beaten along with allegations of demand of dowry. Consequently on 8.4.2021 at 6.45 P.M. she died due to hanging. Subsequently, statement of the complainant was recorded during investigation. In his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the allegation levelled in the first information report were reiterated and it has been vehemently submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no specific allegation with regard to applicant's role in the death of the deceased. Similarly even in the statement of other witnesses no role of the applicant has been brought forth.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Geeta Mehrotra v. State of U.P., (2012) 10 SCC 741 wherein it has been held that unless there are specific allegations family members are entitled to grant of bail. He submits that the case of the applicant deserves sympathetic consideration for enlarging her on bail.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the case of the present applicant is similar to the case of Ram Dulari, who is the co-accused in the same F.I.R. i.e. wife of the present applicant and mother-in-law of the deceased, who has been granted bail by this Court vide its order dated 15.07.2021 in Bail No.7326 of 2021.
6.Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
7.Having heard learned counsel appearing for the contesting parties and having perused the records and also the fact that there is no specific role assigned to the applicant and the applicant has made out a case of parity with Ram Dulari. The applicant is in jail since 9.4.2021, the Court finds this to be a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let the applicant Shivraj involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(v) 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 (iv) argument / judgment.
(vi) 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.
(vii) Since the certified copy of this order, in view of the COVID-2019 pandemic, may not be easily available to the applicant, the applicant may file computer generated copy of this order from the official website of this Court and self- attested by the learned counsel for the applicant, before the concerned Magistrate/Court/Authority/Official.
(viii) The concerned Magistrate/Court/Authority/ Official, before accepting such computerized copy, filed by the applicant, as genuine, shall verify its authenticity from the official website of this Court.
(ix) Office is also directed to send a computerized copy of this order to the District Judge concerned through e-mail or the fax, as the case may be, forthwith.
9. 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 :- 26.7.2021
S. Kumar
