Ramkishore v. State of U.P.) came up for orders on
Case Details
Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40549 of 2021 Applicant :- Ramkishore Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nitendra Kumar,Satyam Narayan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Connected with Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40426 of 2021
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Smt.Laxmi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nitendra Kumar,Satyam Narayan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. Heard Mr. Satyam Narayan, learned counsel for applicants Ramkishore and Smt. Laxmi and learned A.G.A. for State. These applications for bail have been filed by applicants Ramkishore and Smt. Laxmi seeking their enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 36 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Pali, District Lalitpur, during the pendency of trial. Perused the record. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40549 of 2021 (Ramkishore Vs. State of U.P.) came up for orders on 23.02.2022 and this Court passed following order:- "1. Heard Mr. Satyam Narayan, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A submits that Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.40426 of 2022 (Smt. Laxmi vs. State of U.P.) filed by co-accused is already pending before this Court. 3. In view of above, connect afore-mentioned criminal misc. bail application alongwith present application for bail. 4. Matter shall re-appear as fresh on 03.03.2022 alongwith connected matter." Pursuant to above order dated 23.02.2022, aforementioned bail
Decision
applications stood connected. They have now been listed together. As both the bail applications arise out of same case crime number, they have been heard together and are now being disposed of finally by a common order. Record shows that the marriage of Arti was solemnized with Raja Bhaiya, younger brother of applicant Ramkishore in June 2020. However, even before the expiry of a period of one year from the date of marriage of younger brother of the applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 28.3.2021, in which Arti, wife of younger brother of the applicant died as she committed suicide by jumping in the well. It is the case of applicants that the information regarding aforesaid incident was given to the parents of the deceased on 29.3.2021. However, the information regarding aforesaid incident was given by one Ram Singh at concerned police station. On the basis of aforesaid information, the inquest (panchayatnama) of the deceased was conducted on 29.3.2021. In the opinion of the witnesses of inquest (panch witnesses), the nature of death of deceased was characterized as suicidal. Thereafter the postmortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on 29.3.2021. In the opinion of Autopsy Surgeon, cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia as a result of ante mortem drowning. The Autopsy Surgeon found following ante mortem injuries on the body of the deceased:- (1) An abrasion 0.5 cm x 02.2 cm in size over dorsal of proximal digit of right hand tnt (2) Blood mixed froath tnt around nostrils (3) Maceration of both hand facet tnt (4) froath + tnt wind pipe all organs are congested. Both wings are oedelnatous scrollth on cutting squeezing red colon fluid ooz out, cretery fulid tnt in stomach. After the aforesaid exercise had been undertaken, first informant Khilawan (father of the deceased) lodged a delayed F.I.R. dated 31.3.2021, which was registered as Case Crime No. 36 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Pali, District Lalitpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R., seven persons namely Rajabhaiya, Nandla, father-in-law, Smt. Munni, mother-in-law, Ramkishore, jeth, Laxmi, jethani, Phool Singh, jeth and Bharati, jethani have been nominated as named accused. After lodging of aforementioned F.I.R., Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr. P. C. Investigating Officer examined the first informant and 5 other witnesses under Section 161 Cr. P. C. On the basis of above and other material collected during course of investigation, Investigating Officer came to the conclusion that complicity of five of the named accused is established in the crime in question. He, accordingly, submitted charge sheet dated 24.6.2021, whereby five of the named accused have been charge sheeted, whereas two of the named accused namely Phool Singh (jeth) Bharati (jethani) have been exculpated. Learned counsel for applicants contends that though cognizance has been taken by court concerned upon aforementioned charge sheet, the case has not yet been committed to the Court of Sessions. Learned counsel for applicants contends that though applicants are named as well as charge sheeted accused, but they are innocent. Applicants are jeth and jethani of the deceased. Allegations made in the F.I.R. with regard to deficient amount of dowry brought by the deceased at the time of her marriage and subsequent demand of additional dowry are false and concocted. Allegations made in the F.I.R. goes to show that deceased was instigated by named accused to commit suicide. However, upto this stage, there is no material on record on the basis of which it can be definitely concluded that present applicants have instigated, conspired or abetted in the commission of alleged crime. There is no evidence regarding commission of physical or mental cruelty upon deceased by present applicants either. He, therefore, submits that applicants have been wrongly charge sheeted under Section 498A, 304 B IPC. It is next contended that applicants are jeth and jethani of the deceased. They are living separately as is established from the family register, copy of which is on record at page 32 of the paper book. The deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken extreme step of committing suicide by jumping in the well. Learned counsel for applicants further submits that the applicant Smt. Laxmi is a lady and therefore, by virtue of the provisions contained in proviso to Section 437 Cr. P. C., she being a lady is liable to be enlarged on bail. Applicants cannot be said to be beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry either. It is lastly contended that applicants are of clean antecedents, inasmuch they have no criminal history to their credit except the present one. Applicants are in jail since 24.6.2021. As such, they have undergone more than 9 months of incarceration. In case, applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed these applications for bail. He submits that since applicants are named as well as charge sheeted accused, they do not deserve any sympathy of this Court. However, he could not dispute the factual and legal submissions urged by learned counsel for applicants. Having heard learned counsel for applicants, learned A.G.A. for the state, upon perusal of material brought on record, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and accusation made, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the applicants have made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail applications are allowed. Let the applicants Ramkishore and Smt. Laxmi, involved in aforesaid case crime number, be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under section 229-A I.P.C.. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C. (iv) The applicants 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 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants 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 them in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicants, shall have serious repercussion on their bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above. Order Date :- 6.4.2022 HSM Digitally signed by HARI SHANKER MISHRA Date: 2022.04.07 17:51:02 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad