2023 (10) TMI 1372 - SCH - Indian Laws

Seeking grant of bail - Unnatural death of a lady - proceeding has been started under Sections 304-B/34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code - Charges have been framed and trial has been commenced without the husband being arrested and it is submitted on behalf of the State that he is absconding - HELD THAT - The question of grant of bail to a co-accused person cannot made dependent upon surrender of another accused who is described as the main accused person in this case. The imposition and subsequent adhering to the condition of surrender of the husband of the deceased would not be necessary for grant of bail to the appellant - the impugned order modified and it is directed that the appellant may be released on bail in terms of the order(s) of the High Court but the condition which requires prior surrender of husband of the deceased should not be insisted upon for enlarging the appellant on bail. Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are related to the grant of bail to a co-accused person in a case involving unnatural death of a lady under Sections 304-B/34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, where the husband is described as the main accused and the appellant is the brother of the husband.

Judgment Summary:

Grant of Bail without Husband's Surrender:
The Supreme Court addressed the issue of bail for the appellant, who is a co-accused in a case of unnatural death of a lady. The High Court had granted bail with a condition that the husband of the deceased, described as the main accused, must surrender first. The Supreme Court held that the grant of bail to a co-accused cannot be made dependent on the surrender of another accused. Therefore, the Court modified the order and directed the release of the appellant on bail without insisting on the condition of the husband's surrender.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and directed the release of the appellant on bail without the condition of the husband's surrender. The Court clarified that the imposition and adherence to such a condition were not necessary for granting bail to the appellant. Pending applications were also disposed of in light of this decision.