Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1448 (ALL)

Babloo @ Pravesh (Second Bail) v. State of U. P.

2015-05-29

SUDHIR KUMAR SAXENA

body2015
JUDGMENT Sudhir Kumar Saxena, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. This is second bail application on behalf of the applicant. First bail application was dismissed in default vide Crl. Misc. case no. 1794 of 2014 on 04.04.2014. 3. It is contended that marriage had taken place three years ago. Applicant took his wife for treatment to district Hospital, Barabanki and thereafter to KGMC Trauma Centre where she succumbed on the night of 13.09.2012. Cause of death has been found to be ante-mortem partial hanging. There is no other injury found either in the inquest or in the postmortem. Co-accused having similar allegations have been granted bail by this Court in Bail No. 7382 of 2012 and Bail no. 27 of 2014. Other co-accused has been granted bail by the Sessions Judge, Barabanki. Submission is that there was neither any demand of dowry nor any cruelty, as such applicant has been falsely implicated. Applicant is lying in jail since 4. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 5. Let the applicant- Babloo @ Pravesh involved in Case Crime No. 263 of 2012, under Sections- 498-A/323/506/304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Fatehpur, District- Barabanki be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: - (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him 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 his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the 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 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 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.