A SAMPLE DRAFT BAIL APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 439 of CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973

 

(Accused in Custody since 07.07.2023)

(Sent to J.C. on 11.07.2023)

IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DISTRICT: _______, __________ COURTS, DELHI

BAIL APPLICATION NO. ____ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

PRIYAM RAHI                                 VS                                            STATE                                    

FIR NO. RHN-GP-000112A/2023

U/S: 380 IPC

PS: e-POLICE STATION BEGUM PUR

INDEX

Sr. No.	PARTICULARS	Pg. No.
1.	1st Bail Application U/s 439 of Cr.P.C, 1973 for grant of regular Bail
2.	Annexure-1 (Copy of e-FIR)
3.	Annexure-2 (Copy of the order dated 11.07.2023)
4.	Annexure-2 (Copy of Aadhar Card of the accused)
5.	Vakalatnama

 

DELHI                                   Filed By:-

DATED:                                                            The LAW DECODERS India

Kundan Chandravanshi, Deepak Kardam,

Ravi Chauhan, Avdesh Kumar

(Advocates)

Off: 175/11, Parwana Road, Khureji Khas, Delhi-110051

Mob. No. 8178861642

Email: thelawdecoders@gmail.com

 

(Accused in Custody since 07.07.2023)

(Sent to J.C. on 11.07.2023)

IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DISTRICT: _______, __________ COURTS, DELHI

BAIL APPLICATION NO. ____ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

PRIYAM RAHI                                 VS                                            STATE                                  

FIR NO. RHN-GP-000112A/2023

U/S: 380 IPC

PS: e-POLICE STATION BEGUM PUR

 

MEMO OF PARTIES

GANESH SONI (AGED 50 YEARS)                  

S/O SH. LALTA PRASAD,

R/O D-1/E-61/A-127, NAND NAGARI,

NORTH EAST DELHI-110093

                                                                      ……APPLICANT/ACCUSED

VERSUS

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

THROUGH SHO/IO,

PS: BEGUM PUR

                                                                      ………………RESPONDENT

   DELHI                                   Filed By:-

DATED:                                                          The LAW DECODERS India

Kundan Chandravanshi, Deepak Kardam,

Ravi Chauhan, Avdesh Kumar

(Advocates)

Off: 175/11, Parwana Road, Khureji Khas, Delhi-110051

Mob. No. 8178861642

Email: thelawdecoders@gmail.com

 

(Accused in Custody since 07.07.2023)

(Sent to J.C. on 11.07.2023)

IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DISTRICT: _______, __________ COURTS, DELHI

BAIL APPLICATION NO. ____ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

PRIYAM RAHI                                 VS                                            STATE                                        

FIR NO. RHN-GP-000112A/2023

U/S: 380 IPC

PS: e-POLICE STATION BEGUM PUR

 

FIRST BAIL APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 439 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, SEEKING REGULAR BAIL IN THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED MATTER, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT/ACCUSED NAMELY _________, S/O ________________, R/O __________________________________________

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -

1.    1. That, this is the first bail application u/s 439 of Cr.P.C, 1973 seeking regular bail in the FIR No. RHN-GP-000174/2023, U/S: 380 IPC, PS: e-POLICE STATION BEGUM PUR, filed on behalf of the applicant/accused.

 

2.    2. That, applicant/accused is innocent and has not committed any offence whatsoever. A copy of the Aadhar Card of the Applicant/Accused is ANNEXURE-1.

 

3.    3. That, the applicant/accused has not been named in the present FIR.

 

4.   4.  That, the present e-FIR was registered by the complainant, Sh. Brij Lal Yadav, alleging the theft of some jewellery and Rs. 100,000/- cash from his residence on 10.03.2023, between 2:30 PM to 4:30 PM. A copy of the FIR is ANNEXURE-2.

 

5.  5.   That, during the course of the investigation, the police arrested the co-accused who, in his disclosure statement, implicated the applicant/accused as being involved in the commission of offence mentioned in FIR. Consequently, the applicant/accused was arrested on 07.07.2023 from his jewellery shop in Nand Nagari.

 

6.   6.  That, the applicant/accused was produced before the Ld. Magistrate on 08.07.2023, and the police sought one day of custody to recover the stolen articles. However, despite the custody granted, no recovery was made. Subsequently, the applicant/accused was produced before the Magistrate on 09.07.2023, and another day of police custody was granted for the same purpose.

 

7.    7. That, furthermore, no notice under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC) was served upon the applicant/accused. The offense he is charged with, under Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), carries a maximum punishment of up to 7 years.

 

8.   8.  That, the IO, while making the arrest of the applicant/accused has also violated the guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court set out in the case of D.K. Basu vs State of West Bengal, as no arrest memo was prepared or signed by the any of the family members of the accused or member of his locality.

9.    9. That at this stage, there remains nothing to be asked or investigated in relation to the applicant/accused.

 

10. That, the police have not been able to recover any incriminating evidence from him, and he has fully cooperated throughout the investigation.

 

11. That, it is worth mentioning here that on 10.07.2023, the applicant/accused moved his 1^st bail application under section 437 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 seeking regular bail in the present FIR, before the Hon’ble Court of Sh. Navdeep Gupta, Ld. Duty MM, North, Rohini Courts, Delhi, which was dismissed by the Ld. Magistrate. A copy of the Order dated 10.07.2023, is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-3 for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.  

 

12. That, at the time of hearing of the said bail application, the IO submitted that Rs. 10,000/- had been recovered from the Applicant/Accused. It is vehemently submitted here that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant/accused and the said recovery is a planted recovery for justifying the period of Police Custody taken by the IO in the name of investigation and recovery.

 

13. That, the applicant/accused is an innocent Goldsmith who operates a small jewellery shop and solely provides for his family.

 

14. That, the applicant/accused is 50 years old person and is suffering from age-related ailments, making him particularly vulnerable.

 

15. That the applicant/accused was not named in the e-FIR filed by the complainant.

 

16. That, the co-accused who implicated the applicant/accused has a history of habitual offenses, with multiple pending cases against him, thereby undermining his credibility and reliability.

 

17. That, the applicant/accused has already undergone significant humiliation and mental agony as a result of his arrest and subsequent custody, which has extended for more than a week.

 

18. That, it is pertinent to note that the presumption of innocence is firmly in applicant/accused's favour until the prosecution proves his guilt beyond all reasonable doubts.

 

 

19. That, there is no eye-witness or any kind of public witness in the case, hence there is no apprehension of accused/applicant influencing or threatening them so as to dissuade them from disclosing the truth to the Police or Court.

 

20. That, the applicant/accused undertakes not to temper with the evidence of the case, while on bail.

 

21. That, the applicant/accused shall be in a better position to make his defence, if he is released on bail by the Hon’ble Court.

 

22. That, it is well-established that Bail Is the General Rule And Jail Is The Exception.

 

23. That, my client is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and assures this Hon'ble Court that he will be available whenever required by the police or the Court.

 

24. That, the applicant/accused shall not outside of the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court while on bail without the prior permission of this court.

 

25. That, the applicant/accused is ready and willing to furnish sound surety to the satisfaction of the Court, if he is released on bail.

 

26. That, the applicant/accused is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by the Hon’ble Court while granting him bail in the matter.

 

27. That, the applicant/accused seeks permission of this Hon’ble Court to argue/submit any further/additional argument/documents at the time of hearing on this application.

 

PRAYER:-

                          It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present bail application, and grant regular bail to the applicant/accused in the FIR No. RHN-GP-000174/2023, U/S: 380 IPC, PS: e-POLICE STATION BEGUM PUR, in the interest of Justice.

 

Delhi

Dated: 10.07.2023                                                   Applicant/Accused

Through

The LAW DECODERS India

Kundan Chandravanshi, Deepak Kardam,

Ravi Chauhan, Avdesh Kumar

(Advocates)

Off: 175/11, Parwana Road, Khureji Khas, Delhi-110051

Mob. No. 8178861642

Email: thelawdecoders@gmail.com

(Accused in Custody since 07.07.2023)

(Sent to J.C. on 11.07.2023)

IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DISTRICT: _______, _______ COURTS, DELHI

BAIL APPLICATION NO. ____ OF 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: -

PRIYAM RAHI                                VS                                            STATE                                    

FIR NO. RHN-GP-000174a/2023

U/S: 380 IPC

PS: e-POLICE STATION BEGUM PUR

LIST OF DOCUMENTS

1.    ANNEXURE-1 (Copy of Aadhar Card of the Applicant/Accused)

2.    ANNEXURE-2 (Copy of e-FIR in question)

3.    ANNEXURE-3 (Copy of order dated 10.07.2023)

4.    VAKALATNAMA

 

 DELHI                                   Filed By:-

DATED:                                                            The LAW DECODERS India

Kundan Chandravanshi, Deepak Kardam,

Ravi Chauhan, Avdesh Kumar

(Advocates)

Off: 175/11, Parwana Road, Khureji Khas, Delhi-110051

Mob. No. 8178861642

Email: thelawdecoders@gmail.com

 

WOMEN LAWS IN INDIA: Analysis and Conclusion (PART-2)

1. THE COMMISSION OF SATI (PREVENTION) ACT, 1987 

The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987 is a law in India that prohibits the practice of sati, which is the act of a woman burning herself to death on her husband's funeral pyre. Sati is an ancient Hindu practice that has been condemned by many as a barbaric and inhumane tradition.

The Act provides for the punishment of any person who commits sati, or abets the commission of sati, with imprisonment for up to seven years and a fine. The Act also provides for the punishment of any person who glorifies the practice of sati, or attempts to justify it, with imprisonment for up to one year and a fine.

In addition to these criminal penalties, the Act also provides for the establishment of a Commission of Sati (Prevention) to investigate and report on the commission of sati and to recommend measures for the prevention of sati. The Act also allows for the appointment of Special Courts to try cases related to sati, and it gives the state governments the power to take necessary measures to prevent the commission of sati.

The Act has been effective in preventing the occurrence of sati in India, and it has been widely praised for its role in promoting gender equality and protecting the rights of women. However, it has also faced some criticism, with some arguing that it is a form of cultural imperialism and that it undermines the autonomy of women.

Overall, the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987 is an important law in India that has played a significant role in the protection of women's rights and the promotion of gender equality in the country.

There have been a number of landmark judgments related to the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987, which is a law in India that prohibits the practice of sati, or the act of a woman burning herself to death on her husband's funeral pyre.

One notable judgment related to the Act was the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Rajesh Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2006). In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Act and held that the practice of sati was incompatible with the values of a modern, democratic society. The Court also held that the Act did not violate the right to freedom of religion, as the practice of sati was not an essential part of the Hindu religion.

Another significant judgment related to the Act was the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Jagdamba v. State of Haryana (2016). In this case, the Court considered the question of whether the Act applied to a woman who had voluntarily chosen to commit sati, or whether it was limited to cases where the woman was coerced or forced into committing sati. The Court held that the Act applied to all cases of sati, regardless of whether the woman had voluntarily chosen to commit the act or had been coerced or forced into it.

These are just a few examples of the landmark judgments related to the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987. The Act has played a significant role in the protection of women's rights and the promotion of gender equality in India, and it has been the subject of numerous legal challenges and judicial decisions.

The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Rules, 1988 are regulations in India that were issued under the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987. The Act is a law that prohibits the practice of sati, which is the act of a woman burning herself to death on her husband's funeral pyre.

2. Commission of Sati (Prevention) Rules, 1988.

The Rules provide for the establishment of a Commission of Sati (Prevention), which is responsible for investigating and reporting on the commission of sati and for recommending measures for the prevention of sati. The Rules also provide for the appointment of a Chairperson and Members of the Commission, as well as for the procedure for the conduct of the Commission's meetings and the powers of the Commission.

In addition to these provisions, the Rules also contain provisions related to the filing of complaints and the investigation of cases related to sati. The Rules provide for the appointment of Special Courts to try cases related to sati, and they give the state governments the power to take necessary measures to prevent the commission of sati.

The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Rules, 1988 have played a significant role in the implementation of the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987, which is an important law in India that has helped to protect the rights of women and promote gender equality in the country. The Rules have been widely praised for their role in combating the practice of sati and promoting the rights of women in India.

3.Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939

The Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 is a law in India that provides for the dissolution of marriages among Muslims in the country. The Act applies to all Muslims in India, regardless of whether they are followers of the Shia or Sunni sects of Islam.

Under the Act, a Muslim woman can seek the dissolution of her marriage on the grounds of cruelty, desertion, and other specified grounds under section 2 of the Act.

Section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 reads as:-

"2.Grounds for decree for dissolution of marriage.—A woman married under Muslim law shall be entitled to obtain a decree for the dissolution of her marriage on any one or more of the following grounds, namely:— —A woman married under Muslim law shall be entitled to obtain a decree for the dissolution of her marriage on any one or more of the following grounds, namely\:—"

(i) that the whereabouts of the husband have not been known for a period of four years; (i) that the whereabouts of the husband have not been known for a period of four years;"

(ii) that the husband has neglected or has failed to provide for her maintenance for a period of two years; (ii) that the husband has neglected or has failed to provide for her maintenance for a period of two years;"

(iii) that the husband has been sentenced to imprisonment for a period of seven years or upwards; (iii) that the husband has been sentenced to imprisonment for a period of seven years or upwards;"

(iv) that the husband has failed to perform, without reasonable cause, his marital obligations for a period of three years; (iv) that the husband has failed to perform, without reasonable cause, his marital obligations for a period of three years;"

(v) that the husband was impotent at the time of the marriage and continues to be so; (v) that the husband was impotent at the time of the marriage and continues to be so;"

(vi) that the husband has been insane for a period of two years or is suffering from leprosy or virulent venereal disease; (vi) that the husband has been insane for a period of two years or is suffering from leprosy or virulent venereal disease;"

(vii) that she, having been given in marriage by her father or other guardian before she attained the age of fifteen years, repudiated the marriage before attaining the age of eighteen years: (vii) that she, having been given in marriage by her father or other guardian before she attained the age of fifteen years, repudiated the marriage before attaining the age of eighteen years\:" Provided that the marriage has not been consummated; Provided that the marriage has not been consummated;"

(viii) that the husband treats her with cruelty, that is to say,— (viii) that the husband treats her with cruelty, that is to say,—"

(a) habitually assaults her or makes her life miserable by cruelty of conduct even if such conduct does not amount to physical ill-treatment, or (a) habitually assaults her or makes her life miserable by cruelty of conduct even if such conduct does not amount to physical ill-treatment, or"

(b) associates with women of evil repute or leads an infamous life, or (b) associates with women of evil repute or leads an infamous life, or"

(c) attempts to force her to lead an immoral life, or (c) attempts to force her to lead an immoral life, or"

(d) disposes of her property or prevents her exercising her legal rights over it, or (d) disposes of her property or prevents her exercising her legal rights over it, or"

(e) obstructs her in the observance of her religious profession or practice, or (e) obstructs her in the observance of her religious profession or practice, or"

(f) if he has more wives than one, does not treat her equitably in accordance with the injunctions of the Quran; (f) if he has more wives than one, does not treat her equitably in accordance with the injunctions of the Quran;"

(ix) on any other ground which is recognised as valid for the dissolution of marriages under Muslim law: (ix) on any other ground which is recognised as valid for the dissolution of marriages under Muslim law\:" Provided that—

(a) no decree shall be passed on ground (iii) until the sentence has become final; (a) no decree shall be passed on ground (iii) until the sentence has become final;"

(b) a decree passed on ground (i) shall not take effect for a period of six months from the date of such decree, and if the husband appears either in person or through an authorised agent within that period and satisfies the Court that he is prepared to perform his conjugal duties, the Court shall set aside the said decree; and (b) a decree passed on ground (i) shall not take effect for a period of six months from the date of such decree, and if the husband appears either in person or through an authorised agent within that period and satisfies the Court that he is prepared to perform his conjugal duties, the Court shall set aside the said decree; and"

(c) before passing a decree on ground (v) the Court shall, on application by the husband, make an order requiring the husband to satisfy the Court within a period of one year from the date of such order that he has ceased to be impotent, and if the husband so satisfies the Court within such period, no decree shall be passed on the said ground. (c) before passing a decree on ground (v) the Court shall, on application by the husband, make an order requiring the husband to satisfy the Court within a period of one year from the date of such order that he has ceased to be impotent, and if the husband so satisfies the Court within such period, no decree shall be passed on the said ground."

As per the Act, a Muslim man can also seek the dissolution of his marriage on certain grounds, including the non-fulfillment of the wife's marital obligations and the mental or physical incapacity of the wife as provided under section 2 of the Act.

The Act also provides for the appointment of arbitrators to assist in the resolution of disputes related to the dissolution of a Muslim marriage. If the parties are unable to reach a settlement through arbitration, they can seek the dissolution of their marriage through the courts.

The Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 has played a significant role in protecting the rights of Muslims in India and in providing a legal mechanism for the dissolution of Muslim marriages. The Act has been widely praised for its role in promoting gender equality and protecting the rights of women within the Muslim community in India.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985) considered the question of whether a Muslim man was required to provide maintenance to his divorced wife, as provided for under the Act. The Court held that the husband was required to provide maintenance to his divorced wife, as the provisions of the Act applied to all Muslims in India regardless of their sect. The decision sparked a controversial debate and led to the passage of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, which amended the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act to specify the amount of maintenance that a Muslim man was required to pay to his divorced wife.

4. THE DIVORCE ACT, 1969

The Divorce Act, 1869 was a law in India that provided for the dissolution of marriages among Christians in the country. The Act applied to all Christians in India, regardless of their denomination.

Under the Act, a Christian woman could seek the dissolution of her marriage on the grounds of adultery, cruelty, desertion, and other specified grounds. A Christian man could also seek the dissolution of his marriage on certain grounds, including the adultery of his wife and the non-fulfillment of the wife's marital obligations.

The Act provided for the appointment of a Judge to hear cases related to the dissolution of a Christian marriage, and it allowed for the appointment of arbitrators to assist in the resolution of disputes. If the parties were unable to reach a settlement through arbitration, they could seek the dissolution of their marriage through the courts.

The Divorce Act, 1869 was in effect until 1976, when it was replaced by the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872. The Indian Christian Marriage Act is still in effect today and provides for the dissolution of marriages among Christians in India.

5. THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961

The Dowry Prohibition Act 1961 (DPA) is a statute of India which prohibits dowry and any attempt to give or receive dowry. The act was passed by the Parliament of India in 1961. The act applies to all persons, irrespective of their gender, who are not within the definition of spouses under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. It also applies to parents and guardians of married daughters. The act prohibits any form of coercion in relation to giving or receiving any property as dowry from either a husband or a woman who is not below the age of 18 years or from her parents or guardian in relation to an unmarried daughter who is below 21 years of age. The act does not apply to gifts made by parents or guardians on behalf of their married daughters or on behalf of unmarried daughters above 21 years old for marriage ceremonies, religious ceremonies, domestic purposes like maintenance and education etc.

.....................TO BE CONTINUED