# Ram Awatar & Anr. (In Jail) v. State of U.P

- **Citation:** (2021) 3 ILRA 10
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2021-02-22
- **Case number:** Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5704 of 2021
- **Bench:** Rahul Chaturvedi
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/ram-awatar-anr-in-jail-v-state-of-u-p-46871
- **Pages:** 9

## Headnote

A. Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,
1860-Sections 304-B, 498-A & Dowry
Prohibition
Act,
1961-Section
3⁄4application-grant of bail-the entire family
has been roped in, unmindful of the fact of
interse
relationship
by
attributing
a
general and omnibus role to everybody-
she has hanged herself as per medical
report-no
evidence
collected
during
investigation that husband abetted her or
conspired or intentionally aided herHowever, she used to tell the atrocities
and
mal
treatment
to
her
parentsaffidavits of informant, his wife and his
son within 16 days of her untimely death
by somersaulting and diluting the entire
3 All. Ram Awatar & Anr. Vs. State of U.P.
11
story,
cursing
their
own
daughter(deceased), being short and ill
tempered
lady,
is
nothing
but
for
monetary consideration arrived between
them-the state is a Prosecutor whereas
informant and others are only to assist
their prosecutor-thus, without taking the
prosecutor into confidence,, the informant
on his own, can not absolve the accused
persons from the guilt that too outside the
Court with motive(Para 1 to 21)

B. The informant can not permitted to
withdraw the proceeding according to
his
choice
and
whims.
These
proceedings were not initiated by the
informant for joy ride or to achieve his
ulterior motive. the law courts cannot sit
with its eyes closed or in the stage of
oblivion to the ground realities of the
society whereby such type of truce are
rampant between rival parties for the
obvious considerations. Such types of
affidavits
in
the
midst
of
he
investigation or at any other stage
should take stringent action against the
deponent of such affidavits who want to
derail the prosecution against the wrong
doer. It is the binding duty of the court
to discourage, deprecate and shall not
become party to such type of nefarious
design
and
motivated
friendship
between the rival parties, it would lead
to far-reaching adverse impact overt the
society. (Para 18)

The Bail Application is allowed. (E-5)

## Text

10 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
input tax credit wrongly availed has not
been finally made by the Department and
no order under section 83 of the C.G.S.T.
Act for provisional attachment of any
property including the bank account
belonging to the applicant has been made.
The order granting bail to the applicant has
also
not
been
challenged
by
the
Department.

23.

Considering
the
facts
and
circumstances of the case as well as
averments as mentioned in paragraph 2 of the
second
supplementary
affidavit
dated
22.02.2021, this Court is of the view that
condition No. 4 imposed by Special Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Meerut directing the
applicant to deposit remaining amount of ITC
Rs. 4,51,00,000/- (rupees four crore fifty one
lac only) before the Department within three
months while granting bail to the applicant, is
unsustainable, as it is too harsh and
unreasonable, particularly in the situation
where enquiry/investigation is still pending
and applicant has already deposited Rs.
5,00,00,000/- (rupees five crore only), out of
disputed amount of Rs. 9,51,00,000/- (rupees
nine crore fifty one lac only). In view of
above, in order to save the Government
revenue, the interest of justice would be
served in case, the condition No. 4 of bail
order dated 24.11.2020 is modified directing
the applicant to submit security equivalent to
remaining
disputed
amount
of
Rs.
4,51,00,000/- (rupees four crore fifty one lac
only), other than cash and bank guarantee
along with his affidavit in place of deposit the
remaining amount of ITC of IGST, before the
Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI, Regional
Unit, Ghaziabad within three weeks from
today, as per the undertaking given by the
applicant before this Court.

24. In view of aforesaid facts and for
the reasons stated above, the condition No.
4 of the bail order dated 24.11.2020 is
modified to the extent as mentioned above.
On non-furnishing security by the applicant
as per his undertaking before this Court, it
is open for opposite party No. 2 to move
bail cancellation application.

25. Accordingly, the bail application
under section 439 (1)(b) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, is disposed of in the
aforesaid terms.
----------
(2021)03ILR A10
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 19.02.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE RAHUL CHATURVEDI, J.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5704 of 2021

Ram Awatar & Anr. ...Applicants(In Jail)
Versus
State of U.P. ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Applicants:
Sri Kameshwar Singh

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
A.G.A.

A. Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,
1860-Sections 304-B, 498-A & Dowry
Prohibition
Act,
1961-Section
3⁄4application-grant of bail-the entire family
has been roped in, unmindful of the fact of
interse
relationship
by
attributing
a
general and omnibus role to everybody-
she has hanged herself as per medical
report-no
evidence
collected
during
investigation that husband abetted her or
conspired or intentionally aided herHowever, she used to tell the atrocities
and
mal
treatment
to
her
parentsaffidavits of informant, his wife and his
son within 16 days of her untimely death
by somersaulting and diluting the entire
3 All. Ram Awatar & Anr. Vs. State of U.P.
11
story,
cursing
their
own
daughter(deceased), being short and ill
tempered
lady,
is
nothing
but
for
monetary consideration arrived between
them-the state is a Prosecutor whereas
informant and others are only to assist
their prosecutor-thus, without taking the
prosecutor into confidence,, the informant
on his own, can not absolve the accused
persons from the guilt that too outside the
Court with motive(Para 1 to 21)

B. The informant can not permitted to
withdraw the proceeding according to
his
choice
and
whims.
These
proceedings were not initiated by the
informant for joy ride or to achieve his
ulterior motive. the law courts cannot sit
with its eyes closed or in the stage of
oblivion to the ground realities of the
society whereby such type of truce are
rampant between rival parties for the
obvious considerations. Such types of
affidavits
in
the
midst
of
he
investigation or at any other stage
should take stringent action against the
deponent of such affidavits who want to
derail the prosecution against the wrong
doer. It is the binding duty of the court
to discourage, deprecate and shall not
become party to such type of nefarious
design
and
motivated
friendship
between the rival parties, it would lead
to far-reaching adverse impact overt the
society. (Para 18)

The Bail Application is allowed. (E-5)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi, J.)

[1] Heard Sri Kameshwar Singh,
learned counsel for the applicants and
learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

[2] The applicants who are aged old
parents-in-law are facing prosecution in
case crime no.162 of 2020, under sections
498A, 304-B IPC and Section 3⁄4 of D.P.
Act, Police Station-Atarra, District-Banda
and behind the bars since 01.09.2020.

[3] Submission made by learned
counsel for the applicants, is that the
applicants reside at Mohallah-Ambedekar
Nagar, Ward No.6, Nagar Panchayat Oran,
Bisanda, District-Banda but the informant
has purposely shown their address in the
FIR as Mohallah-Krishna Nagar, Gutthilla
Purwa, Police Station-Attara, DistrictBanda. This by itself shows that the
applicant has got two distinct places of
residences, one at Police Station-Bisanda
and another is at Attara.

[4] It is contended that the FIR was
got registered by Ram Pratap Kori on
30.08.2020 at 20:26 hours for the alleged
unfortunate incident said to have taken
place at 5:00 am on the same day. The next
submission is that informant's daughter
Bandana got married with Rajju@Pawan
on 29.05.2019. After three months of her
marriage when she came from her 'sasural'
to her parent's place, then she shared the
atrocious behaviour qua her, by none other
than her own husband and other in-laws in
connection with motorcycle, golden chain
and Rs.50,000/- as an additional dowry. It
is further submitted that almost on the
regular basis, threats were extended to her
with regard to the aforesaid demand of
additional dowry but keeping in view the
future of her daughter, the informant did
not take any legal recourse or prosecuted
them for alleged dowry related atrocities.
On the eve of "Rakshabandhan" when the
deceased came to her parent's place, again,
she reiterated the same sad saga regarding
step-motherely treatment to her for want of
additional
dowry.
She
has
scarcely
informed that there is persistent demand for
above articles and cash amount else
anything untoward may happen to her.

On 28.08.2020, around six in the
morning, the son-in-law of the informant,
12 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
informed him about the untimely and
mysterious
demise
of
Bandana(hence
deceased). Soon thereafter, the informant
and other relatives reached to the spot, and
saw that after assaulting her daughter, all
the named accused persons killed her and
her dead body was lying on the bed with
number of bruises over her person. From
the FIR , it is explicitly clear that the
SCRIBE of the FIR was none other than
the first informant Ram Pratap Kori
himself, showing his address as MohallahAmbedekar Nagar, Ward No.6, Nagar
Panchayat Oran, Bisanda, District-Banda.
Thus, on the hand written chik report by the
informant Ram Pratak Kori over which he
has put his own signatures, the FIR was got
registered within reasonable time of the
incident.

On the aforesaid prosecution
story, it was pointed out by learned counsel
for the applicants, that it is the applicant
no.1 who has informed the police on the
same day by G.D. Entry no.020 dated
28.08.2020 at 12:48 hours, informing that
her daughter-in-law has committed suicide
by hanging herself. Thus, it was argued by
learned counsel for the applicant that no
effort was made on the part of the applicant
either to fled away from the site or to do
any other action to hide or dilute the
gravity of the offence. On the contrary,
applicant no.1 himself informed the police
about this unfortunate incident that his
daughter-in-law has committed suicide.
Thereafter, the formalities of the inquest
was performed on the same day in which
the informant and his brother put his
signatures as one of "Panch". On this, it is
further argued that, there is no whisper of
any dowry related harassment or demand
by the named accused persons from
informant or his brother who were present
during the inquest proceedings. It was
unanimously decided by all the 'PANCHS',
that probably she has committed suicide by
hanging herself but in order to ascertain
exact cause of her death, her autopsy was
required. Accordingly, on the same day, her
autopsy was done i.e. on 28.08.2020 by the
doctor and as per post mortem report, there
is obliquely placed ligature mark around
the neck with a gap. Except the aforesaid,
there is no mark of injury over the person
of the deceased as asserted by the
informant in its FIR as well as in the 161
Cr.P.C. statement. In addition to this, her
saliva was drooling from the left side of the
mouth. On this, it was opined by Dr.Balbir
Sahu that the deceased died on account of
'asphyxia as a result of ante mortem
hanging'. During investigation, the police
recorded the statements of the first
informant Ram Pratap Kori and his wife
Prema, annexure nos.4 and 5 respectively
who gave the statement on the dotted lines
supporting the prosecution case mentioned
in the FIR. Thus, the informant and his wife
who initiated the criminal prosecution by
setting up a particular story of dowry
related harassment and atrocities upon their
daughter, and these greedy persons(named
accused persons) on this account has
created such a situation for her that she has
left with no other option but to commit
suicide within one and half years of her
marriage at her husband's place.

[5] Learned counsel for the applicant
has canvassed his lengthy arguments but
for the sake of brevity that are being
formulated hereinbelow :-

(a) It is the applicant who has
given the news to the police on the same
day of the incident by G.D. Entry no.020
dated 28.08.2020 at 12:48 hours. Had there
been any ill-motive on the part of the
applicant, he along with other co-accused
might have fled away from the place of
3 All. Ram Awatar & Anr. Vs. State of U.P.
13
occurrence. Their conduct shows their
bona-fides beyond reasonable doubt.

(b) There is inordinate delay of
more than two days in lodging of the FIR
for which there is no justification coming
forward to bridge this time gap.

(c) While the informant and other
relatives who were signatories of the
inquest, were present but there is no
whisper
with
regard
to
the
alleged
additional dowry or its related atrocities
upon her daughter. The theory of the
additional dowry has been tailored after
legal consultation.

(d)
General
and
omnibus
allegation has been levelled against all the
named accused persons who used to harass
and ill-treat her daughter(deceased) during
her life time for account of aforementioned
additional dowry.

(e) The doctors has opined that
the deceased has committed suicide by
hanging herself and there could be
thousand reasons for taking this extreme
step within short span of time of her
marriage.

There is no other mark of any
injury
over
her
person
belying
the
allegations made in the FIR that she was
subject matter of physical assault prior to
her death by the accused/applicant. In
paragraph no.29 of the affidavit, it has been
mentioned that small 'kid' of the deceasedBandana was fallen down from the bed
while
sleeping
in
the
night
and
consequently, her husband Rajju@Pawan
scolded her and manhandled her for this
carelessness. On account of this, she felt
annoyed and committed suicide by hanging
herself. And lastly the applicants are elderly
person of 60+ years suffering from number
of age related ailments. In addition to
above, it has also been argued that
presently, the applicants are permanent
resident of Mohallah-Ambedekar Nagar,
Ward
No.6,
Nagar
Panchayat
Oran,
Bisanda,
District-Banda
whereas
the
incident took place at Mohallah-Krishna
Nagar, Gutthilla Purwa, Police StationAttara,
District-Banda
and
thus
the
applicants have got no say in the internal
matter of husband and wife. Last but not
the least, it has been submitted that after
fourteen days of the incident on 14.09.2020
and 16.09.2020, the informant, his wife
Smt. Prema and son-Umesh Kumar have
given their respective affidavits addressed
to the Superintendent of Police, Banda
somersaulting from her earlier stand
regarding dowry related atrocities upon her
daughter, rather, accusing her own late
daughter for being stubborn and hot &
short tempered lady and thereafter giving a
clean chit to the named accused persons.

[6] Learned A.G.A. vehemently
opposed the bail application of the
applicant who are parent-in-laws of the
deceased by inviting the attention of the
Court to the provisions of Section 113(A)
of the Indian Evidence Act. The deceased
has committed suicide within one and half
of years of her marriage under mysterious
and unnatural circumstances at the place of
her husband. The aforesaid provision
regarding the presumption would apply to
its full force in a given set of circumstance.
It has been further argued that despite of
stringent enactment, this social menace is
not coming under the control. Bride
burning, dowry related atrocities and
killing the brides after the marriage for
want of additional dowry is now become
order of the day. Under the circumstances,
it has been urged that no leniency is
required to be shown for such type of
offenders.

[7] After hearing the aforesaid
submissions made by learned counsel for the
14 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
applicant, the Court feels that there is distinct
place of residence as shown. It is highly
unlikely that the applicants constantly tease
or harass her daughter for want of additional
dowry. Moreover, they are elderly person and
senior citizen suffering from number of
ailments. There is little chance regarding their
involvement in the present offence. These
facts receive greater significance when
general and omnibus role has been attributed
to all the accused persons for the dowry
related harassment to her. There could not be
any denial of the fact that she has committed
suicide by hanging herself at MohallahKrishna Nagar, Gutthilla Purwa, Police
Station-Attara, District-Banda where she
resided with her husband. It is the husband
who
should
have
been
much
more
responsible to secure and protect his wife.
The applicants have given the information to
the police at the earliest, should also be taken
in account while deciding the bail application
of the applicant. If the Court takes cumulative
effect of all these factors mentioned above, at
least the applicants who are elderly persons,
have made out the case for bail in their
favour. However, the bail application of the
husband would be on the different footing
and shall be decided with distinct and more
stringent parameters.

[8] Keeping in view the nature of the
offence, evidence and elderly age of the
applicants, the complicity of the accused in
commission of the offence and lastly the inter
se relationship of the applicant with the
deceased, and having regard that they reside
in separate place of residence as canvassed by
learned counsel for the applicants, I am of the
view that the applicants have made out a fit
case for bail.

[9] Let the applicant, Ram Awatar
and Smt. Rajapati, who are involved in
case crime no.162 of 2020, under Section
498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act, Police StationAtarra, District-Banda, be released on bail
on their furnishing a personal bond and two
sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the court concerned subject
to following conditions. Further, before
issuing the release order, the sureties be
verified.

(i) THE APPLICANTS SHALL
FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE
EFFECT THAT THEY SHALL NOT SEEK
ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE
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 APPLICANTS SHALL
REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL
COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER
PERSONALLY OR THROUGH THEIR
COUNSEL.
IN
CASE
OF
THEIR
ABSENCE,
WITHOUT
SUFFICIENT
CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY
PROCEED AGAINST THEM UNDER
SECTION 229-A IPC.

(iii)
IN
CASE,
THE
APPLICANTS MISUSE THE LIBERTY OF
BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER
TO
SECURE
THEIR
PRESENCE
PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82
CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF
APPLICANTS FAIL TO APPEAR BEFORE
THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN
SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE
TRIAL
COURT
SHALL
INITIATE
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER
SECTION 174-A IPC.

(iv) THE APPLICANTS SHALL
REMAIN
PRESENT,
IN
PERSON,
3 All. Ram Awatar & Anr. Vs. State of U.P.
15
BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON
DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF
THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE
AND (3) 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 THEM IN ACCORDANCE
WITH LAW.

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY
MAKE
ALL
POSSIBLE
EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO
CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A
PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE
RELEASE OF THE APPLICANTS.

[10] In case of breach of any of the
above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail without any reference
to this Court.

[11] It is made clear that observations
made in granting bail to the applicants
shall not in any way affect the learned trial
Judge in forming his independent opinion
based on the testimony of the witnesses.

[12] Since, the bail application has
been
decided
under
extra-ordinary
circumstances, thus in the interest of justice
following additional conditions are being
imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be
released on bail forthwith. Needless to
mention that these additional conditions are
imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

1.
The
applicants
shall
be
enlarged on bail on execution of personal
bond
without
sureties
till
normal
functioning of the courts is restored. The
accused will furnish sureties to the
satisfaction of the court below within a
month after normal functioning of the
courts are restored.

2. The party shall file computer
generated copy of such order downloaded
from the official website of High Court
Allahabad.

3. The computer generated copy
of such order shall be self attested by the
counsel of the party concerned.

4.
The
concerned
Court/Authority/Official shall verify the
authenticity of such computerized copy of
the order from the official website of High
Court Allahabad and shall make a
declaration of such verification in writing.

'To the court concerned against
the deponent of the Affidavit' :-

[13] As mentioned above, learned
counsel for the applicants have laid
excessive stress upon the affidavits of first
informant Ram Pratap Kori, Prema Devi
and Umesh Kumar addressed to the
Superintendent of Police, Banda, while
pressing the bail application. The Court, is
not at all impressed by these affidavits of
informant, his wife and son which are
annexed as Annexure-8 to the affidavit.
The Court has seen those affidavits and its
text. These affidavits are of 14.09.2020
and 16.09.2020 respectively. By these
affidavits the informant, his wife and son
have completely changed the texture and
nature of the entire prosecution story. It is
indeed shocking that the parents and his
son have taken a sharp somersault from
the prosecution story set up by none other
than the informant Ram Pratap Kori
himself and in their respective 161 Cr.P.C.
statement, the said story was supported by
his wife Prema Devi and his son Umesh
Kumar. Thereafter, within sixteen days of
her
untimely
demise,
the
aforesaid
16 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
affidavits addressed to the Superintend of
Police, Banda came into picture whereby
all
of
them
accuses
their
own
daughter(deceased) for being ill and short
tempered lady. The contents of the
affidavits and its timing speaks oceans
about the nature, character and the psyche
of the informant and his family members.
The text of the affidavit sworn by
informant
Ram
Pratap
Kori
dated
14.09.2020 reads thus :-

"1- ;g fd 'kiFkdrkZ us viuh iq=h
oUnuk mez 21 o"kZ dh 'kknh jTtw mQZ iou iq=
jkevkSrkj fuoklh xqf

3& ;g fd 'kiFkdrkZ dh iq=h ftn~nh
LoHkko dh] xqLlSy izd`fr dh FkhA ekewyh ckr
ij viuk lUrqyu [kks nsrh FkhA 'kiFkdrkZ dh
yM+dh oUnuk dh e`R;q fnukad 28-08-2020 dks
lqcg 4&5 cts ds yxHkx Qkalh yxkus ds dkj.k
gq;h gSA

4& ;g fd oUnuk ds ifr jTtw us
bldh lwpuk 'kiFkdrkZ dks nh Fkh] mlh lwpuk
ij 'kiFkdrkZ igqapk] ns[kk fd oUnuk csM esa e`r
iM+h FkhA 'kiFkdrkZ ;g lnek cnkZLr ugha dj
ldk rFkk mlds fnekx us dke djuk gh cUn
dj fn;k FkkA 'kiFkdrkZ cngokl gkyr esa gks
x;k FkkA

5^& ;g fd eqfYteku ds xkao ds
yksxksa us crk;k fd oUnuk dks ekj Mkyk x;k gSA
mlus Qkalh ugha yxk;h gSA mlh vk/kkj ij
lwpuk nsus Fkkus x;k FkkA Fkkus dh iqfyl ls
eqfYteku ds xkao ds yksxksa us ckr fd;k] fQj
iqfyl o xkao ds yksxksa us fjiksVZ dk etcwu
cukdj rgjhj Fkkus esa cuh gSA 'kiFkdrkZ us
dsoy n'dr cuk fn;k FkkA 'kiFkdrkZ us Lo;a
cksydj fjiksVZ ugha fy[kk;h gSA fjiksVZ i<+dj Hkh
ugha lqukbZ x;h gSA 'kiFkdrkZ cggks'k gkyr esa
FkkA ckn esa 'kiFkdrkZ us tkudkjh fd;k] rc
irk pyk fd vfHk;qDrx.k us oUnuk dks ekjk
ugha gS] cfYd oUnuk Lo;a Qkalh ij yVd dj
tku fn;k gSA oUnuk o mlds ifr ls ekeqyh
dgk lquh gq;h FkhA

6& ;g fd 'kiFkdrkZ dks ;g Hkh irk
pyk fd ftu yksxksa us cjxyk dj vfHk;qDrx.k
dh fjiksVZ djk;h gS] og vfHk;qDrx.k ls jaft'k
ekurs gaS] rc 'kiFkdrkZ fcuk ncko ds o cxSj
ykyp ds ;g gfYQ;k c;ku Jheku~ th ds le{k
ns jgk gS] rkfd oDr ij dke vkosA"

[14] Though, this affidavit is sworn
by the informant but the rest of two
affidavits are of Prema Devi and Umesh
Kumar, son of the informant. The contents
of the affidavits are on the same lines with
minor changes. From the text of the
affidavits, a clean chit was given to his
counter parts as well as the husband. Not
only this, they have accused their own
deceased daughter for lady of being
stubborn in nature and ill-tempered who
used to loose her mental balance quite
often. It has been mentioned in the affidavit
that after receiving the information, the
informant too lost his mental cool and in
the bewildered stage of mind, lodged the
present FIR. Paragraph nos.5 and 6 of the
affidavit is per se misleading on the face of
record. It has been mentioned that some
unknown scribe has prepared the chik FIR
and informant has only put his signature
over it, in a disturbed state of mind. The
keen perusal of the FIR blatantly exposes
the falsehood and attempt to mislead the
Court by the informant in this regard.

[15] It is interesting that the FIR was
lodged by none other than the informant
Ram Pratap Kori himself on 30.08.2020 for
the incident said to have taken place on
28.08.2020 against six named accused
persons related to husband Rajju@Pawan.
As pointed earlier part of this order,
fortunately, the scribe of the chik FIR is
Ram Pratap Kori himself by which the
present FIR came into existence with the
specific allegation that there was demand
of one motorcycle, a golden chain and
Rs.50,000/- as an additional dowry by the
named accused persons. All of them used to
3 All. Ram Awatar & Anr. Vs. State of U.P.
17
maltreat her and at times became physical
also. The deceased quite often shared these
atrocities with her parents. Even five days
prior to the incident on the eve of
"Rakshabandhan", when she visited her
place, she repeatedly shared the illtreatment faced by her. Eventually within
one year and three months of her marriage,
she was done to death under mysterious
circumstances at her matrimonial place by
hanging herself.

[16] On this prosecution story, the
first informant has mobilized all the limbs
of the State Machinery. The chik report too
was in own handwriting and after third day
of the incident, giving ample time to the
informant Ram Pratap Kori to collect the
material and other relevant information
regarding the incident, cool down and get
himself satisfied regarding the involvement
of named accused persons in the offence. It
is literally mind-boggling for the Court, as
to what transpired to the informant, his
wife and his son to give their respective
affidavits, within sixteen days of her
untimely death by somersaulting and
diluting the entire prosecution case up-side
down,
cursing
their
own
daughter(deceased), being short and ill
tempered lady. The reason seems to be
quite obvious. The Court cannot accept this
alleged "sudden wisdom" dawn upon them
to get the nature of the offence changed.
Such type of affidavits are rampant now-adays for simple reason. This alleged truce
between the rival parties outside the Court
is nothing but for monetary considerations
arrived between them.

[17] Section 304-B IPC prescribes
punishment relating to dowry deaths is a
serious and heinous offence, a crime
against the society. The legislature in its
own wisdom in order to curb this heinous
offence with iron hands, has made it nonbailable and cognizable offence in which
rigorous imprisonment for seven years to
life imprisonment is prescribed. This is
non-compoundable offence. No person or
the informant is permitted to by-pass the
due procedure of law or abandon the
proceeding initiated by him with a specific
allegation with regard to the dowry related
atrocities upon the deceased and thereafter
killing or creating such a situation where
she commits suicide under unnatural
circumstances within seven years of her
marriage for want of additional dowry at
her matrimonial place.

Let us examine the legal sanctity
of these three affidavits given by the
informant, wife and his son in the light of
above discussion. The informant is now not
permitted to withdraw the proceeding
according to his choice and whims. As
mentioned
earlier
that
these
criminal
proceedings are solemn proceedings, after
lodging of the FIR, all the wings of the State
got charged and are on their toes. These
proceedings were not initiated by the
informant for a joy ride or to achieve his
ulterior motive or purpose. The informant is
not permitted to use the present criminal
prosecution just to twist the arm of his
opponent for some ulterior monetary gains.
The law-courts cannot sit with its eyes
closed or in the stage of oblivion to the
ground-realities of the society whereby such
type of truce are rampant between the rival
parties for the obvious considerations. The
law-courts are bound to hold the majesty
and the rule of law and consequently for a
orderly society, they must ignore such type
of affidavits in the midst of the investigation
or at any other later stage and should take
stringent action against the deponent of such
affidavits who want to derail the prosecution
against the wrong doer. It is the binding duty
18 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
of the courts to discourage, deprecate and
shall not become a party to such type of
nefarious design and motivated friendship
between the rival parties. If these affidavits
are accepted, and consequently prosecution
against the wrongdoers are abandoned, it
would lead to far-reaching adverse impact
over the society.

Yet another legal aspect of the issue
is initiation of criminal prosecution after
lodging of the FIR. The 'State' is a prosecutor
whereas informant and others are only to
assist their prosecutor. Thus, without taking
the prosecutor into confidence, the informant
on his own, cannot absolve the accused
persons from their guilt that too outside the
Court with motive. This would amount to the
mockery of criminal judicial dispensation
system and has to be discouraged, deprecated
by all means and might.

[18] This Court is not at all inclined to
accept these affidavits Annexure-8 sworn by
Ram Pratap Kori, Prema Devi and Umesh
Kumar. This Court directs to the court
concerned having competent jurisdiction to
hold in-depth probe into the matter engaging
some senior police officer at least of a C.O. rank
to verify and explore, whether the prosecution
story narrated by the informant in the FIR, is
true and correct OR the averements made and
signed by the aforesaid persons in their
respective affidavits are correct? If any such
"deal" is there between them, then what was the
monetary considerations were passed? This
probe must conclude within fifteen days from
the release of the applicants on bail and
thereafter, the court concerned, if some material
are surfaced against the informant, his wife and
son, should register miscellaneous case against
the erring persons under Section 211 IPC or
under any other relevant provisions of IPC after
strictly adhering due process of law prescribed
in Code of Criminal Procedure in this regard.
This miscellaneous criminal proceeding must
conclude within six months from the date of the
registration.

[19] If the legislation in its wisdom has
enacted the stringent action under Section 304B IPC to deal with such heinous offences and
has prescribed the serious punishment against
the wrongdoers, then on the same breath, no
one is permitted to give a hoax call by initiating
a proceeding and in the midst of the said
proceeding, abandon the same for his ulterior
motive or monetary gains.

[20] Let copy of this order be transmitted
to the learned Sessions Judge, Banda with the
expectation that he would monitor the abovesaid miscellaneous proceeding against the
informant Ram Pratap Kori, his wife Prema
Devi and son Umesh Kumar to its logical
conclusion within time specified.

[21] With the above observations, the
present bail application stands allowed against
the named accused persons.
----------
(2021)03ILR A18
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 19.02.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE PRADEEP KUMAR
SRIVASTAVA, J.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19456 of
2019
connected with
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23928 of
2019
connected with
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 29678 of
2019

Wasi Ahmad ...Applicant(In Jail)
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties