Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24469 of 2018 Applicant :- Ratnesh Rai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Maurya,Surya Pratap Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
This is the second bail application of applicant after rejection of his first Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.32693 of 2013 vide order dated 25.3.2015.
Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
In compliance with order dated 16.11.2018 Jail Superintendent, District Jail, Gyanpur at Bhadohi has sent the report of Medical Officer, District Jail, Gyanpur at Bhadohi with his letter dated 27.11.2018.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated for causing dowry death of his wife after a period of about 6 years of marriage for non-fulfilment of demand for Rs.75,000/- allegedly demanded for his business; that the applicant is a younger boy aged about 34 years and has a 6-7 years old son at home; that after rejection of first bail application the applicant is suffering from serious ailment in urinary track and proper treatment is not possible at District Jail, Gyanpur at Bhadohi though he has been sent for better treatment to Sir Sunderlal Hospital, BHU, Varanasi from time to time; that the sessions trial no.125 of 2013 against applicant is not progressing in accordance with law and after framing of charges on 26.6.2014 upto 11.5.2017 only four prosecution witnesses have been examined in a period of 3 years and since 11.5.2017 till today no further witness has been examined by prosecution during the period of last 1½ years; that in these circumstances there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future; that the applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since 8.3.2013 over a period of 5½ years; that if the applicant is not released, he will not be able to get proper treatment of his acute ailment and may suffer irreparably; that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and contended that the first bail application of applicant has been dismissed on merits and there is no sufficient ground for allowing his second bail application, however, learned A.G.A. submitted that he has no reason to dispute the report submitted by Medical Officer, District Jail, Gyanpur at Bhadohi.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record, I find that in the report dated 22.11.2018 of Jail Superintendent sent to Sessions Judge, Bhadohi, filed at R.A.-2 and the report of Medical Officer, Bhadohi dated 27.11.2018 annexed with the letter of Jail Superintendent, Gyanpur at Bhadohi dated 27.11.2018 it has been mentioned that under trial prisoner Ratnesh Rai is under treatment of Sir Sunderlal Hospita, BHU, Varanasi, who is suffering from the ailment of Chyluria with fatty liver and acute pain with bleeding at the time of urination. It has also been mentioned that his treatment of cystoscopy + RPIS has been done earlier in BHU which could not be successful and for want of proper security his proper treatment is not possible at due times.
Considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, medical report submitted by Jail Superintendent, District Jail, Gyanpur at Bhadohi as well as the period of detention over 5½ years as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Ratnesh Rai be released on bail in Case Crime No.47 of 2013, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Gyanpur, District Sant Ravidas Nagar (Bhadohi) on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
Order Date :- 30.11.2018 Kpy