Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8669 of 2019 Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramanuj Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Rajendra Kumar seeking bail in Case Crime No. 72 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Hathras.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that present incident is an outcome of matrimonial discord. The applicant was married to the victim on 19.02.2017. False allegation of demand dowry has been made against the applicant and for non-fulfilment of which, it is alleged that the victim was harassed and maltreated.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim, in which, it is stated that on account of non-fulfilment of demand of dowry, entire family members including the applicant had assaulted her, however, there is no injury to corroborate the aforesaid story. It is further argued that real sister of the victim has also been married with the elder brother of the applicant and no grievance has been made by her and she is living peacefully along with the family members of the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail since 25.01.2019 and in case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
Per contra, learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail since 25.01.2019.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Rajendra Kumar 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 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 :- 27.2.2019 Nadim