HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. – 14
Case :- BAIL No. – 7768 of 2018
Applicant :- Daulatram
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Kant Dixit
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sheikh Mohammad Ah.
Hon’ble Anant Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 325 of 2018, under Sections 498A, Section304B I.P.C. Section 3/Section4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali Nanpara, District Bahraich.
As per version of the F.I.R. marriage of the deceased had taken place with the applicant on 29.02.2012. It is alleged that as additional dowry one she-buffalo was demanded and due to non fulfillment of the said demand, deceased was tortured and was killed by hanging. It is stated by learned counsel for the applicant that out of the wedlock applicant was having two daughters. Applicant was a labourer and was doing labour work at Lucknow. There was no occasion to demand a she-buffalo after such a long time. As per post mortem report, except ligature mark there is no other injury has been found on the body of the deceased. Ligature mark was also interrupted by 5 C.M.
Opposing the bail learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant has stated that there was a demand of she-buffalo and due to non fulfillment of the said demand, she was done to death.
Except ligature mark no other injury has been found. It appears that due to some family dispute she has committed suicide.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant (Daulatram) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to 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.
Order Date :- 24.7.2019