Allahabad High Court
Rambeti vs State Of Up Thru Its Secratary Home on 28 August, 2023
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:173683
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35259 of 2023
Applicant :- Rambeti
Opposite Party :- State Of Up Thru Its Secratary Home
Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Kashyap,V.P. Singh Kashyap
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. V.P. Singh Kashyap, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
2. Perused the record.
3. This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Rambeti, seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 134 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Dholna, District-Kasganj during the pendency of trial.
4. Record shows that in respect of an incident, which is alleged to have occurred on 17.05.2023, a prompt FIR dated 17.05.2023 was lodged by first informant-Pramod Kumar (brother of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No. 134 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC, Police Station-Dholna, District-Kasganj. In the aforesaid FIR, 5 persons namely- (1) Amar Singh, (2) Itwari, (3) Smt. Pushpa, (4) Smt. Rekha and (5) Smt. Rambeti have been nominated as named accused.
5. Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. Since applicant is a lady, therefore, by virtue of the provisions contained in proviso to Section 437 Cr.P.C., she is liable to be enlarged on bail. The deceased was a short tempered lady and has taken an extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. Bona-fide of the applicant is also explicit from the fact that the Autopsy Surgeon, who conducted the autopsy of the body of deceased did not find any other external ante-mortem injuries on the body of deceased except for the ligature mark. The husband of deceased i.e. the son of the applicant is already languishing in jail. There is no allegation in the FIR regarding demand of additional dowry or commission of physical and mental cruelty upon the deceased on account of non fulfillment of demand of additional dowry. On the above premise, he submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
6. Even otherwise, applicant is a woman of clean antecedents inasmuch as, she has no criminal history to her credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 01.06.2023. As such, he has undergone more than 2 and 1/2 months of incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized. However, up to this stage, no such circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. On the above premise, it is thus urged that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.
7. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that since applicant is a named as well as charge sheeted accused inasmuch as, the charge sheet has been submitted against applicant on 11.06.2023, therefore, she does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dislodge the factual and legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage.
8. Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, accusations made and complicity of applicant coupled with the fact that applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased, since applicant is a lady, therefore, she is entitled to the benefit of the provisions contained in proviso to Section 437 Cr.P.C., the police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized, in spite of above, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance from the record necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sumit Subhashchandra Gangwal Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 373 (Paragraph 5), the bona-fide of the applicant is explicit from the fact that except for the ligature mark, no other external ante-mortem injuries was found on the body of deceased, prima-facie, the death of deceased is a suicidal death, there is no allegation in the FIR that demand of additional dowry was made from deceased and on account of non fulfillment of the said additional demand of dowry, physical and mental cruelty was committed upon the deceased, the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, but without making any comments on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.
9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant-Rambeti, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her 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/SHE 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.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
11. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on her bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 28.8.2023
Vinay
