Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Kanth Shree vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 July, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27551 of 2018 Applicant :- Kanth Shree Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Preet Pal Singh Rathore Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.159 of 2018, under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act Police Station-Kadar Chowk, District-Budaun is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR was lodged by the father of the deceased against five accused persons including the applicant. The allegation is that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by the accused persons in connection with the demand of one motorcycle as an additional dowry and due to continuous harassment, she was tortured till her death. The applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. General and ominous role has been attributed to all the five accused persons for setting her ablaze. The further submission is that the applicant resides separately. To buttress his contention, learned counsel has annexed copies of Ration Card and NAREGA Card as Annexure-7 to the bail application showing therein that the applicant resides separately and the applicant has different entity altogether. She could not be said to have the beneficiary of the additional demand of dowry. Learned counsel further submitted that the police has submitted the charge-sheet. The applicant is in jail since 08.06.2018, having no criminal antecedents to her credit.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the relationship of the applicant with the deceased, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that co-accused has been granted bail, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-Kanth Shree, involved in case crime no.159 of 2018, under Section 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act Police Station-Kadar Chowk, District-Budaun be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following 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 DATE 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 HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) 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 HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on her bail so granted by this court.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Sumit S
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Kanth Shree vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 July, 2018
Judges
  • Rahul Chaturvedi
Advocates
  • Preet Pal Singh Rathore