Allahabad High Court
Badri Yadav vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 27 July, 2023
Bench: Brij Raj Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:49404
Court No. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9448 of 2023
Applicant :- Badri Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, Sri Divakar Singh, learned AGA-I for State and perused record.
2. This bail application has been filed by the applicant for bail in case crime No.02 of 2023 under Section 498A, 306 IPC & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition NAct, PS Nawabganj, district Bahraich.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the informant received news of death of his father. He had given death report to police station which is recorded on G.D. No.7 on 4.1.2023 and no allegation of dowry demand or dowry harassment or anything adverse against the applicant or family members has been stated in the said G.D. The inquest was also performed on 4.1.2023 and the complainant and the brother of complainant both were present during inquest. Thereafter, FIR was lodged on 6.1.2023 making allegation of dowry demand and harassment and stated that his daughter died because of dowry demand. The FIR was lodged under Section 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. Thereafter statement under Section 161 CrPC was recorded and after investigation it was found that marriage of deceased had taken place with the applicant prior to ten years, therefore, Section 304B IPC was deleted. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that after looking into the factual position, it cannot be said that the applicant has abetted the crime any manner.
4. He has also relied on the judgment dated 17.10.2001 of Supreme Court in the Appeal (Crl.) 617 of 2000 (Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh), and has tried to pursue the Court that subject a woman to cruelty may amount to an offence under Section 498-A and may also, if a course of conduct amounting to cruelty is established leaving no other option for the woman except to commit suicide, amount to abetment to commit suicide. However, merely because an accused has been held liable to be punished under Section 498-A IPC it does not follow that on the same evidence he must also and necessarily be held guilty of having abetted for commission of suicide by the woman concerned. He has submitted that there is no direct evidence collected by the Investigating Officer which may indicate that the applicant has abetted the crime. He has further submitted that while postmortem was conducted, no injury was found on the person of deceased and viscera was preserved. The report of viscera has come on record and it has been found that the deceased consumed aluminum phosphide. He has submitted that the applicant has no other criminal history and he is in Jail since 8.5.2023.
5. Learned AGA on the basis of instructions received, has submitted that the deceased was done to death by the applicant because the family members of the deceased could not fulfil the dowry demand made by the inlaws. He has further submitted that the deceased died in the house of the applicant, therefore, the bail is liable to be rejected.
6. Considering over all facts and circumstances of the case, the argument that general allegation of dowry demand is levelled, the marriage had taken place prior to ten years, the postmortem report does not support the prosecution case and as per viscera report the aluminum phosphide is found and the argument that no direct evidence of abetment is found, it is a fit case for bail.
7. Let the applicant, namely, Badri Yadav be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) 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.
(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 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.
8. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order.
Order Date :- 27.7.2023
Rajneesh JR-PS)
