SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ram Govind vs State Of U.P. on 9 January, 2020


?Court No. – 55

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 6433 of 2019

Applicant :- Ram Govind

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava,Anoop Kumar,Ganesh Shanker Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record.

Heard Sri Ganesh Shanker Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Ram Govind with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 83 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 306 I.P.C., Police Station Sonha, District Basti.

As per prosecution version, the first information report was lodged by Smt. Nirmala for the offences under Sections 498A, 306 I.P.C. and under the same section, the charge sheet has also been filed by the police. It has further been alleged in the first information report that the deceased was married with Ram Gopal, who often lived in Mumbai in respect of his work and taking benefit of the same, the accused applicant tried to indulge in illicit relationship with the deceased by giving all kinds of allurements. On the date of incident, the deceased was found to have been hanged.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the charges were framed against the accused applicant and till date six witnesses have been examined andall the fact witnesses have been declared hostile. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant has been in jail since 03.07.2018, hence, he is entitled to bail.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.

Order Date :- 9.1.2020




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation