High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40243 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4820 of 2025 Applicant :- Radheyshyam Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kiran Yadav,Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajeev Upadhyay Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised.
Legal Reasoning
2. Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajeev Upadhyay, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Radheyshyam Rajbhar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 453 of 2024, under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Jahanaganj, District Azamgarh. 4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 29.08.2024 by Ramcharan Rajbhar against the applicant and 03 other persons alleging therein that his sister Parwati was married to the applicant on 19.06.2018. After marriage the accused persons used to taunt her & assault her for less dowry. There was demand of a chain and Rs. one lakh as dowry. He went to her in-laws house and consoled them many times but they did not agree to it. On 28.08.2024 at about 11.00 p.m. he received an information that his sister has been murdered after which he went there and found her to be dead. The first information report be lodged and action be taken. 5. The postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted in which the doctor found a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death was opined as as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there was never any demand of dowry either by the applicant or his family members. It is further submitted that marriage of Rajesh the brother of the applicant was solemnized in the year 2023 whereas marriage of the applicant was solemnized in the year 2018 but the applicant and the deceased had no children and as such she was under depression, paragraph 29 & 30 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court. Further while placing paragraph 31 & 34 of the affidavit it is submitted that the deceased was undergoing treatment since 2021 and even in the ultrasound report, the copy of which is at page 118 of the paper-book the doctor was of the opinion that the findings are suggestive of mild polycystic right ovary with small right ovarian cyst with PID. It is submitted that the deceased was having some problem due to which she could not conceive, annexure-14 being the medical prescription and the ultrasound report has been placed before the Court. It is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge-sheet has been submitted. It is submitted that except for the ligature mark the deceased was not found to have received any other bodily injury. It is submitted that as such the death of the deceased is suggestive of suicide. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 42 of the affidavit and is in jail since 30.08.2024. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. It is submitted that there are allegations of demand of dowry, torture & harassment of the deceased by the applicant and other co-accused persons. It is further submitted that the deceased died within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house and as such the prayer for bail be rejected. 8. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant and the deceased were married in the year 2018. There was some complication and they had no children since then. The deceased was also under treatment for the same. The brother of the applicant was married after about four years and was having a child. 9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 10. Let the applicant- Radheyshyam Rajbhar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 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 him, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) 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 351 B.N.S.S., 2023. 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant. 11. 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. 12. The bail application is allowed.
Decision
13. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad