Ramdulari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13928 of 2023 Applicant :- Ramdulari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Pal,Desh Deepak Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶1Heard Shri Sandeep Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as Shri Ranvijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2This bail application has been filed seeking release of the accused/applicant Ramdulari on bail, who is involved in Case Crime No. 191 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 304-B I.P.C and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition. Act, Police Station-Nagram, District Lucknow.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that First Information Report has been lodged by the father of the deceased, wherein general allegation of dowry demand has been levelled against all the the co-accused. It is further alleged in F.I.R that the in-laws used to demand motorcycle and a gold chain as additional dowry. He further submitted that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself and the applicant has no concern with the alleged offence. It has been further submitted that the statement of father, mother and brother of the deceased, under Section 161 Cr.P.C has been recorded by the police and all of them have admitted that marriage of the deceased was performed at the house of the applicant also known as Paanvpooji as the family of the deceased was very poor and they could not give dowry that is why proposal of Paanvpooji was made by the applicant's family and marriage was performed at the house of the applicant. This fact has been admitted by all the witnesses namely Kalidev (father of applicant), Suman (mother of applicant) and Ravi (brother of applicant).

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant was residing separately and she has filed a compromise between her elder son and the husband of deceased which clearly indicates that the applicant clearly expressed her opinion to reside with her elder son. As per post-mortem report, one injury (multiple contusion) is found on the body of the deceased and ligature mark on the neck caused due to hanging and the same cannot be attributed to the applicant because she was residing separately. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased, aged about 54 years, who was living separately with her elder son, and she has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for applicant lastly submitted that the applicant is a lady and she may be extended the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C as she is languishing in jail since 06.08.2023.

¶5Learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer of bail of the applicant and has stated that it is a case of dowry death, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail and her bail is liable to be rejected.

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record, also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the argument that general allegation of dowry demand has been levelled against the applicant, the argument that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself, the argument that applicant has a separate living, the argument that the applicant is a lady and has requested for the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail.

¶7Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶8Let the applicant Ramdulari be released on bail in the above case crime number on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case,

(ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law.

¶9It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order. Order Date :- 24.11.2023 DiVYa/Rajneesh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench