Advocates:
['VARAD NATH', '', 'AGARWAL ARCHI PIYUSH', 'G A']

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL

APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3021 of 2022

Applicant :- Surya Narayan@ Sooraj Ojha And Another

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Varad Nath,Agarwal Archi Piyush

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

1. Heard Shri. Varad Nath, learned counsel for the applicants,

Shri.K.P.Pathak, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

2. Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in case crime

no.0024 of 2022 under Sections 498-A and 304-B I.P.C. and

Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police

Station-Bansdih Road, District-Ballia after rejection of his bail

application vide order dated 2.3.2022, passed by learned

Incharge Sessions Judge., Ballia.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the

applicants are father-in-law and mother-in-law. Mother-in-law

is suffering from hundred percent permanent disability in her

left eye. It is also argued by learned counsel for the applicant

that the time period between marriage and death by way of

suicide is less than two months, therefore, ingredients of

Section 304-B could not be made out. The allegations of

demand of dowry are vague in nature and are not specific.

There is a delay of ten days in lodging F.I.R.. It is also

specifically contended hat the deceased was not happy with the

marriage.

4. Opposing the anticipatory bail application, learned A.G.A.

submitted that the deceased died other than normal

circumstances within short period of two months of her

marriage and there are specific allegations against the applicant.

5. Few factors and parameters, which this court has to consider

for exercising discretion for grant or refusal of anticipatory bail

are nature and gravity of accusation,exact role of the accused,

his or her antecedents, possibility of the accused to flee from

justice, likelihood to repeat similar or other offence. Whether

accusation are made only with the object of injury and causing

humiliation to the accused or case is of large magnitude with

possible effect on a large number of people. Greater care and

caution is required while considering cases under section 34

and 149 IPC. Further consideration of threat to complaint and

witnesses and tampering of evidences are other relevant factors.

6. While considering anticipatory bail application this court has

to struck balance between two factors namely, no prejudice

should be caused to the fair and free investigation and accused

should not be subjected to harassment, humiliation and

unjustified detention. This court is justified to impose

conditions spelt out in section 437 CrPC and also other

restrictive conditions if deem necessary in the facts and

circumstances of a particular case including limit of the

anticipatory bail but not in routine manner. An Anticipatory Bail

application has to be based on concrete facts (and not vague or

general allegations) relatable to offence and why the applicant

reasonably apprehends his or her arrest, as well as his version of

the facts.

7. I have perused the F.I.R. It is a case where a married woman

died other than normal circumstances within a period of two

months from her marriage. There are specific allegations of

demand of dowry. Disability certificate shows that applicant

no.2 is blind person with only one eye whereas other eye is

perfectly well, therefore, this cannot be a reasonable ground for

anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, considering the law on anticipatory

bail, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.

9. The anticipatory bail application is rejected.

Order Date :- 9.5.2022

SB

Digitally signed by SANDEEP

BHATTACHARYA

Date: 2022.05.11 10:23:23 IST

Reason:

Location: High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad