SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Kripa Shankar Dubey And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 3 February, 2020


?Court No. – 2


Applicant :- Kripa Shankar Dubey And 2 Others

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Udai Prakash Deo Pandey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pranjal Mehrotra

Hon’ble Suneet Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

Applicant nos.1 and 2 are in-laws of the informant and applicant no.3 is the brother-in-law; the allegation against the applicants and co-accused (husband) is that they have thrown out the informant from the house and retained the belongings of the informant. It is urged that the ingredients of offence under Section 406 I.P.C. is not made out against the applicants; applicants are permanent residents of Jaunpur, F.I.R. has been lodged at Ghaziabad; the instant complaint is in relation to the suit instituted by the co-accused, husband, under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation and the fact that they have no criminal antecedents, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

In the event of arrest of the applicants – Kripa Shankar Dubey, Smt. Rekha Dubey @ Gudiya Dubey and Dhirendra Dubey involved in Case Crime No.2618 of 2019, under Sections 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad, they shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police office as and when required;

(ii) the applicants 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

(iii) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they have passport the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order independently without being prejudice by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicants.

The applicants are directed to produce a certified copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

Order Date :- 3.2.2020




Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2022 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