Quarry about charge sheet on 498a
Rocky
(Querist) 29 June 2016
This query is : Resolved
good morning to all.
I was been accused of 498a,307,494,406,144,107,323,34,125,dv,hma24 etc
charge sheet filed in 498 case
307,494,406 dropped
Also mentioned they were been approached for 406 recovery multiple time but they didn't response.
But police kept 498a in the cs nd also mentioned she was been tortured for dowry from us and as witness her family members one police officer and doctor from municipality hospital mentioned.
And showed me as hidden absconded nd asked for warrent on me.
Is it any cause of worry sir. Other 8 of my family members accused got bail. Mine was pendinfg for 406 recovery. Freshly applied again by my lawyer after charge sheet been filed. All the cases r false i have multiple proff of it. Rather me and my family members are tortured physicaly have audiovisual proff. Pls guide i have my lawyer who looking after but i want to have experts opinions from here. I had always been guided here in this fouram by renowned learned persons multiple time. So seeking for your valuable help once again. Thanks.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 29 June 2016
Since case is filed you have no option but to apply for bail.
Since CS is submitted now your bail petition should be allowed.
Rocky
(Querist) 29 June 2016
Thanks barman sir,
my already already applied AB but in CS its showed me as hidden absconded nd asked for warrant on me. Is it any cause of worry sir. my lawyear is saying it is the way to write cs and will be helpfull to get AB and all. but i somehow got scared a little.
Nitish Banka
(Expert) 29 June 2016
Apply for anticipatory bail
Warm Regards,
Nitish Banka
Rocky
(Querist) 29 June 2016
Thanks for reply nitish sir
I already applied ab, 307,406,494 dropped in CS only 498a,34 nd 523 remains. But police shows me as absconded nd asked for warrent to arrest. My lawyer is saying it will be helpful to apply ab as previously it was rejected on condition to recovery of 406 articles. I want to know the other opinions here if possible. Thanks sir.
Adv. Yogen Kakade
(Expert) 30 June 2016
If you have applied for ab already.. go with strong points.. argue strongly.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 30 June 2016
Present your case strongly for anticipatory bail granting.
Siddharth Dev
(Expert) 30 June 2016
In "Suresh Chand And Ors. vs State Of Rajasthan on 14 March, 2001"
it has been observed;
Maintainability of second anticipatory bail application.
9. The first question that requires my consideration is as to whether second anticipatory bail application after rejection of the first by the High Court, is maintainable ?
10. It may be understood that power to grant anticipatory bail does not flow from Article 21 of the Constitution of India but it has been conferred by the statute enacted by the Parliament and the Parliament can, by amending the Code of Criminal Procedure or by enacting special law take it away also. Even this provision can be omitted by the State Amendment and such amendment will not have the effect of depriving a person of his personal liberty. State of Uttar Pradesh by U.P. State Amendment excluded the applicability of Section 438, Cr.P.C. But the provisions contained in Section 439, Cr.P.C. cannot be omitted as they flow from Article 21 of the Constitution and relate to personal liberty of a person.
"... It is, therefore, absolutely essential that the practice which this Court has been following in the past must be reconsidered and so long as this Court is not in a position to hear the appeal of an accused within a reasonable period of time, the Court should ordinarily, unless there are cogent grounds for acting otherwise, release the accused on bail in cases where special leave has been granted to the accused to appeal against his conviction and sentence."
14. Case of Babu Singh (supra), relates to fundamental right of personal liberty of the accused guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the ratio of the said case is not applicable to the maintainability of second bail application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. As already stated that after dismissal of first bail application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. by the High Court, the accused is not entitled to ask for the same relief again by making second anticipatory bail application as the accusation against the accused remains the same. Anticipatory bail application is filed by the accused apprehending arrest on an accusation of having committed non-bailable offence and once it is denied it cannot be made again and again on the basis of new arguments and new twists. Fact-situation in respect of accusation of non-bailable offence only changes with the filing of final report by the investigating officer and Section 169, Cr.P.C. and not before. Section 169, Cr.P.C. reads as under-
16. Upshot of the above discussion is that-
(i) After rejection of bail application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. by the High Court second anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.
(ii) An order refusing an application for bail under Section 439, Cr.P.C. does not necessarily preclude another on a latter occasion giving more materials, further developments and different considerations.
17. I, therefore, hold that after rejection of bail application made by the accused petitioners before the High Court under Section 438, Cr.P.C, second application for the same relief was not maintainable even before the High Court and the Sessions Judge had absolutely no jurisdiction to entertain the second anticipatory bail application.
"Rejection of bail in a non-bailable case at the initial stage and the cancellation of bail so granted have to be considered and dealt with on different basis. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing the cancellation of bail, already granted."
26. Ratio of Dolat Ram's case (supra), is not applicable in the facts of the instant case. Here the anticipatory bail application of the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased Smt. Vinod was initially dismissed by the High Court but even after the said rejection the Sessions Judge granted second anticipatory bail application made by them. The anticipatory bail granted to the accused petitioners in this manner was cancelled under Section 439(2), Cr.P.C.
So I suggest you to either apply regular bail after surrender or amicably settle this matter.
Thank You;
www.satron19.com
Siddharth Dev
(Expert) 30 June 2016
In "Suresh Chand And Ors. vs State Of Rajasthan on 14 March, 2001"
it has been observed;
Maintainability of second anticipatory bail application.
9. The first question that requires my consideration is as to whether second anticipatory bail application after rejection of the first by the High Court, is maintainable ?
10. It may be understood that power to grant anticipatory bail does not flow from Article 21 of the Constitution of India but it has been conferred by the statute enacted by the Parliament and the Parliament can, by amending the Code of Criminal Procedure or by enacting special law take it away also. Even this provision can be omitted by the State Amendment and such amendment will not have the effect of depriving a person of his personal liberty. State of Uttar Pradesh by U.P. State Amendment excluded the applicability of Section 438, Cr.P.C. But the provisions contained in Section 439, Cr.P.C. cannot be omitted as they flow from Article 21 of the Constitution and relate to personal liberty of a person.
"... It is, therefore, absolutely essential that the practice which this Court has been following in the past must be reconsidered and so long as this Court is not in a position to hear the appeal of an accused within a reasonable period of time, the Court should ordinarily, unless there are cogent grounds for acting otherwise, release the accused on bail in cases where special leave has been granted to the accused to appeal against his conviction and sentence."
14. Case of Babu Singh (supra), relates to fundamental right of personal liberty of the accused guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the ratio of the said case is not applicable to the maintainability of second bail application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. As already stated that after dismissal of first bail application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. by the High Court, the accused is not entitled to ask for the same relief again by making second anticipatory bail application as the accusation against the accused remains the same. Anticipatory bail application is filed by the accused apprehending arrest on an accusation of having committed non-bailable offence and once it is denied it cannot be made again and again on the basis of new arguments and new twists. Fact-situation in respect of accusation of non-bailable offence only changes with the filing of final report by the investigating officer and Section 169, Cr.P.C. and not before. Section 169, Cr.P.C. reads as under-
16. Upshot of the above discussion is that-
(i) After rejection of bail application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. by the High Court second anticipatory bail application is not maintainable.
(ii) An order refusing an application for bail under Section 439, Cr.P.C. does not necessarily preclude another on a latter occasion giving more materials, further developments and different considerations.
17. I, therefore, hold that after rejection of bail application made by the accused petitioners before the High Court under Section 438, Cr.P.C, second application for the same relief was not maintainable even before the High Court and the Sessions Judge had absolutely no jurisdiction to entertain the second anticipatory bail application.
"Rejection of bail in a non-bailable case at the initial stage and the cancellation of bail so granted have to be considered and dealt with on different basis. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing the cancellation of bail, already granted."
26. Ratio of Dolat Ram's case (supra), is not applicable in the facts of the instant case. Here the anticipatory bail application of the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased Smt. Vinod was initially dismissed by the High Court but even after the said rejection the Sessions Judge granted second anticipatory bail application made by them. The anticipatory bail granted to the accused petitioners in this manner was cancelled under Section 439(2), Cr.P.C.
So I suggest you to either apply regular bail after surrender or amicably settle this matter.
Thank You;
www.satron19.com
Rocky
(Querist) 01 July 2016
Dear all,
Thanks for replying to elaboratly. Sir my other 8 accused family member nd relatives got AB. Mine was rejected in lower court on the condition to recovery of 406 articles. But they didn't come to take their belongings we have co operated with police. In CS in was also mention police attempted multiple time but the wife party didn't accept the notice nither came for 406. And 307,494,406 dropped in the CS.
Only 498a and 34,323are there. But IO also stated that she was been tortured though we show all the evidence that the time she mentioned for attempted to murder and all she was stauing in her parents houses. Where she received my divorce notice before filling all these malicious cases on us. Itd good that police dropped 307,494,406 but IO asked for Warent. That i didn't understand. My lawyer saing that will b helpfull to get AB. I am worried and confused. Pls advice and giude. Thanks.
Siddharth Dev
(Expert) 03 July 2016
I have my previous view regarding AB because, it will be your second AB it will be rejected better you contact another lawyer.
Thank you;
www.satron19.com
