BA2/299/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 3996 UK

             Office Notes,
SL.   Date      reports,
No.            orders or                      COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
             proceedings
             or directions
                  and
              Registrar's
              order with
              Signatures
                             BA2 No. 299 of 2022


                             Hon'ble Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.

Mr. Karan Anand, learned counsel for the applicant.

Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, learned A.G.A for the State.

This is the second bail application filed by the applicant - Mr. Sanjeev Verma. He has been charge sheeted for the offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. His First bail application was rejected by this Court on 14.01.2022, holding that a prima facie case under Section 304-B of IPC has been made out against him.

In the meantime, the case has been committed to the Court of Session and the learned trial court has already framed charges. Evidence of one witness for prosecution has already been recorded. PW1 has fully supported the case of the prosecution. Moreover, it is seen that as per the evidence of PW1, on 13.02.2021 at about 11.20 p.m the deceased called Narayan Sharma, her brother, and stated that her in laws were torturing her for the demand of dowry and in the intervening night between 13 and 14 at about 2.30 a.m. they received the information that the deceased has died. Thus, all the ingredients affecting Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code are made out in this case, prima facie. Also there is no change in circumstances in the interregnum after rejection of the first bail application of the applicant.

The learned counsel for the applicant very empathetically argued that the charges under Section 498-A has not been framed against the petitioner, hence the ingredients of section 304- B of the Indian Penal Code are not made out. This argument is not acceptable, as this Court has already held that the offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code is made out. Moreover, if any charge has not been framed erroneously by the Trial Judge, law provides that charges can be reconsidered at any stage before pronouncement of the judgment.

In that view of the matter, this Court finds no reason to allow the 2nd bail application and the same is rejected.

As far as the question of charge is concerned, the learned Assistant Government Advocate shall communicate the copy of the order to the prosecuting agency who is dealing with the matter for appropriate motion to be made before the learned Trial Court.

The second bail application is dismissed. Let a free copy of this order be supplied to the learned A.G.A for the State for early compliance.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.) 13.12.2022 (Grant certified copies as per Rules.)

Nahid