Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56582 of 2019 Applicant :- Ramayan Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Pal,Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant and a joint vakalatnama filed by Sri Anshumali Pandey and Sri Sudhanshu Pandey, Advocates, are taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. of the alleged incident has been lodged against six persons including the applicant making general allegation. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. As per post mortem report, the deceased died due to burn injury. Except the burn injury, no other injury has been found on the body of the deceased. There is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence. The applicant is jeth of the deceased. He is not beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the deceased. At the time of alleged incident, the applicant was residing separate from the deceased and her husband. False story has been concocted by the informant. The co-accused Sandhya Devi, jethani of the deceased, has already been released on bail by another bench of this court vide order dated 11.11.2019 in Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 47283 of 2019, therefore, applicant is also entitled for bail. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 12.6.2019.
Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail and argued that in this case the husband of the deceased is not accused. As per site plan the deceased has sustained injury in the room of the applicant. There was a dispute of partition in between husband of deceased and applicant. The deceased was harassed and tortured by the applicant and other co-accused. The deceased died an unnatural death within a year of her marriage due to burn injury, therefore, applicant is not entitled for bail.
Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Ramayan involved in Case Crime No.152 of 2019, under Section 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station Haldharpur District Mau be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and he will cooperate with the trial.
3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 19.12.2019 Gss