HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. – 29
Case :- BAIL No. – 8294 of 2019
Applicant :- Verma @ Brahmadeen
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav,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.298 of 2018, under Sections 498A, Section304B I.P.C. and Section 3/Section4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Shahabad, District Hardoi.
The occasion of present bail application has arisen on rejection of bail plea by the Sessions Judge, Hardoi vide order dated 23.07.2019
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned counsel further submits that the accused applicant is father in law of the deceased. He was living separately from the deceased. There are general allegation of demand of dowry and no specific role has been assigned to the accused applicant. The deceased has herself committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance. Accused applicant is an old man and is suffering from several ailments. Learned counsel further submits that the accused applicant is languishing in jail since 11.06.2019 and the accused applicant has no criminal history except the present criminal case and is ready to file reliable sureties before the Court. Learned counsel further submits co-accused Asha and Amarveer have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.08.2019 passed in Bail No.7308 of 2019 and order dated 30.08.2019 passed in Bail No.8080 of 2019 respectively. On the ground of parity, the applicant may also be released on bail.
Learned A.G.A has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by learned counsel for the accused-applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by 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 (Verma @ Brahmadeen) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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 :- 3.9.2019