SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Dinesh vs State Of U.P. on 2 August, 2019


?Court No. – 80

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 31197 of 2019

Applicant :- Dinesh

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Ray Sahab Yadav

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Ajit Singh,J.

Sri Kunwar Ajay Singh, learned counsel has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, which is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kunwar Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant in connection with Case Crime No. 101 of 2017, under Sections 420, Section467, Section468, Section471, Section34 IPC, P.S. Deorahat, District Kanpur Dehat.

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the allegation leveled in the FIR is totally false and fabricated. It is further contended that the applicant is the father-in-law (mamiya sasur) of the complainant. It is further contended that the matrimonial dispute is pending between the complainant and her husband and other relatives. It is further contended that the present accused was falsely named in an earlier case registered under Section 498A IPC. Offence is triable by the Magistrate. Lastly, he submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 27.5.2019 and in case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

Learned AGA has opposed the bail plea.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

Let the applicant Dinesh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

Order Date :- 2.8.2019




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation