Court No. - 81

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10022

of 2021

Applicant :- Pramod Kumar

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Raghubir Singh,Tanisha Jahangir

Monir

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Veer Bhagat Singh

Kushwaha

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

1. Heard Tanisha Jahangir Monir, learned counsel for the

applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

2. The applicant has approached this Court by way of filing the

present Criminal Misc. Bail Application seeking enlargement

on bail in Case Crime No.28 of 2020, under Sections 498A,

304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Fatehpur Sikri,

District-Agra after rejection of his Bail Application vide order

dated 27.1.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, (SC/ST Act).

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is

the husband of deceased and ingredients of Section 304-B I.P.C.

are not made out. Even in the suicide note there is nothing on

record in respect of cruelty or demand of dowry. Cause of

death was opined to be 'Asphyxia' due to ante-mortem hanging.

According to her instructions not a single witness has been

examined. The applicant has no other reported criminal

antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 23.6.2020, there is

no likelihood of early disposal of trial and the applicant

undertakes that if enlarged on bail, he will never misuse his

liberty and will co-operate in the trial.

4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application

and submits that death of deceased was under other than normal

circumstances within four years of her marriage and in the

suicide note victim has stated that she was tortured by

applicant.

5. LAW ON BAIL

A. "The basic rule may perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail"

(State Of Rajasthan, Jaipur vs Balchand @ Baliay : (1977 AIR

2447, 1978 SCR (1) 535). Power to grant bail under Section

439 of CrPC, is of wide amplitude. The court is bestowed with

considerable but not unfettered discretion, which calls for

exercise in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course and

not in whimsical manner. (see Ram Govind Upadhyay Vs

Sudarshan Singh :(2002) 3 SCC 598 and Neeru Yadav Vs State

of U.P.:(2016)15 SCC 422).

B. "The considerations in granting bail are the nature and

gravity of the circumstances in which the offence is committed;

the position and the status of the accused with reference to the

victim and the witnesses; the likelihood of the accused fleeing

from justice; of repeating the offence; of jeopardising his own

life being faced with a grim prospect of possible conviction in

the case; of tampering with witnesses; the history of the case as

well as of its investigation and other relevant grounds which, in

view of so many valuable factors, cannot be exhaustively set

out." [Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Administration), (1978)

1 SCC 118)]. "There is no strait jacket formula which can ever

be prescribed as to what the relevant factors could be. However,

certain important factors that are always considered, inter-alia,

relate to prima facie involvement of the accused, nature and

gravity of the charge, severity of the punishment, and the

character, position and standing of the accused" [State of U.P. v.

Amarmani Tripathi, (2005) 8 SCC 21]. In Manno Lal Jaiswal

vs. The State of U.P. and others, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 89

Supreme Court has observed that, "when the Accused were

charged for the offences punishable under Section 149 of the

Indian Penal Code also and when their presence has been

established and it is stated that they were part of the unlawful

assembly, the individual role and/or overt act by the individual

Accused is not significant and/or relevant."

C. "....It has also to be kept in mind that for the purposes of

granting the bail the Legislature has used the words "reasonable

grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means

the court dealing with the grant of bail ca