Santosh Kumar alias Sanjay vs State of U.P.

Alok K. Singh, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused record.

The applicant is involved in Case Crime No.655 of 2008, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Bacchrawan, District Rae Bareli.

As against the complicity of the applicant it is submitted that he happens to be an elder brother (Jeth) who lives separately. In support of the contention the copy of ration card has been filed and original ration card was also submitted before the Court for perusal which has been prepared on 28.08.2006 i.e. about two years prior to the incident. It is submitted that therefore by any stretch of imagination he cannot be said to be prospective beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry. It is further emphasized that the allegations of general nature have been made against him and in the F.I.R. all the innocent relatives and two sisterinlaws (Nanands) including the applicant himself as also his wife have been falsely implicated, as is usually done in such cases. It is also claimed that there is no criminal history against him. He is said to be in jail from December, 2008 i.e. for the last more than five months.

The bail is however, opposed by learned A.G.A.

The points pertaining to nature of accusation, danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail, character, behaviour and position of the accused, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and without entering into the merits of the case and particularly having regard to the discussion made hereinabove, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant (Santosh Kumar alias Sanjay) be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/court concerned.