Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is husband of deceased and their marriage was solemnized in the year 2012 and after that there was no complaint of dowry demand or harassment. It was submitted that applicant was preparing for competitive examination but he could not get selected and from the year 2017, he reached under state of depression and later on he became mentally upset. It has been submitted that now the applicant is a person of unsound mind and that on the basis of recommendation of Medical Board, applicant was sent to Mental Hospital Varanasi from District Jail Kaushambi. Learned counsel has referred several medical documents attached to the instant bail application and submitted that applicant is suffering from mental instability and that since 2017 he was under treatment from Medanta Institute of Neuro-Sciences, Gurgaon. Learned counsel submitted that as per the post-mortem report, the deceased has suffered death due to ante mortem smothering but in view of the mental condition of the applicant, it is apparent that applicant was unable to know the nature of act being committed by him. It has been submitted that for appropriate treatment of applicant, it would be necessary that applicant be released on bail so that he may get appropriate treatment. It was further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 7.11.2019 having no criminal history and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned A.G.A. has stated that the deceased has sustained unnatural death within seven years of marriage and that applicant is husband of deceased. However, above stated medical condition of applicant could not be disputed.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of evidence, period of custody and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Prashant Raghav involved in Case Crime No.275 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 304-B of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2.The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.
5.The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 23.2.2021 Jyotsana