HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. – 11
Case :- BAIL No. – 9682 of 2019
Applicant :- Rajit Ram
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Ratan Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A
Hon’ble Rajeev Singh,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Shri Surendra Kumar Yadav, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record.
Heard, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.226 of 2019 under Sections 498A, Section304 B I.P.C and Section 3/Section4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Safdarganj, District-Barabanki, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and in jail since 17.06.2019. It is further submitted on behalf of applicant that applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that deceased committed suicide due to some quarrel between the husband and wife and no any demand of dowry was every raised by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that inquest of the body of deceased was conducted by Naib Tehsildar, Nawabganj on 15.06.2019. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant and his son were present at the time of inquest and they duly signed the inquest report. He further submitted that the doctor has stated in his statement that the cause of death is due to asphyxia, as a result of antimortem hanging. He further submitted that the statement of informant Bechan Lal and mother of deceased namely Raj Rani were recorded by the Investigating Officer on 18.06.2019 and 20.06.2019 respectively, the aforesaid statements are appended as Anneuxre Nos.5 and 6 to the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the informant has stated in his statement that before 56 days from the date of incident deceased went to her in-laws house from her maternal house, but in the statement of Smt. Raj Rani, she stated that 8 days before the date of incident, the deceased went to her in-laws house. There are major contradiction in the statements of informant and his wife. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of fact and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant -Rajit Ram- be released on bail in Case Crime No.226 of 2019 under Sections 498A, Section304 B I.P.C and Section 3/Section4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Safdarganj, District-Barabanki, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 15.10.2019