SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Prakash vs State Of U.P. on 26 July, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 72

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 11503 of 2021

Applicant :- Prakash

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Tripathi

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0205 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Nauhjhil, District Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

As per the prosecution case in brief, the informant Har Narayan Singh lodged an F.I.R. on 29.05.2020 for the offence under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act against the Prakash (applicant/husband), Deepchand (father-in-law), Smt. Vidya (mother-in-law), Sunil (brother-in-law), Smt. Neetu (sister-in-law), Vishal (brother-in-law) and Sarita (sister-in-law), alleging inter-alia, that the marriage of his daughter (deceased) was solemnized on 09.07.2018 with the applicant. In the marriage he had given dowry as per his capacity. From the wedlock of his daughter and the applicant, a male baby was born, who is presently aged about 8 months. F.I.R. further alleges that accused were not satisfied with the dowry and the deceased was being harassed by the accused persons. They were mounting pressure upon the deceased to bring Rs.2 Lacs for construction of the house. In the intervening night of 29.05.2020 at about 2:30 o’clock, the father-in-law of the deceased (Deepchand) informed him that his daughter is seriously ill. On the said information he alongwith other family members came to her matrimonial house and saw that dead body of his daughter is lying there.

It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that in the postmortem report, the cause of death has been shown as asphyxia due to anti mortem hanging. The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the informant in his first statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. reiterated the prosecution version but in his second statement dated 18.06.2020 has stated that on 28.05.2020 there was telephonic conversation between him and deceased and recording of his conversation dated 28.05.2020 with his daughter (deceased) as well as conversation dated 29.05.2020 with Deepchand (the father-in-law of the deceased) are in his mobile phone and the same were handed over to the Investigating Officer. The extract of the same have been recorded by the Investigating Officer in C.D. No.4. It is also pointed out that from a perusal of the said telephonic conversation, it is clear that there was no complaint of deceased regarding demand of dowry. It is next argued that it appears some altercation took place between the deceased and her sister-in-law (Smt. Neetu). Much emphasis has been given by contending that there is no serious allegation against the applicant in telephonic conversation dated 28.05.2020 between the informant and deceased. It is further submitted that the co-accused Sunil, Vishal and Sarita have been exonerated by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation and other co-accused namely Smt. Vidya Devi and Deepchand have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.12.2020 and 23.11.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.44337 of 2020 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.38803 of 2020 respectively. The applicant is in jail since 03.06.2020. It is lastly submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that there is allegation of demand of dowry in the F.I.R. but does not dispute that in the extract of call recording, as mentioned in the Case Diary No.4 there is no demand of dowry. It is also not disputed that the co-accused Deepchand and Smt. Vidya Devi have been granted by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

After having heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., I find that in the telephonic conversation there was no complaint of deceased regarding demand of dowry and the other co-accused have already released on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

Let the applicant Prakash, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

(v) The applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

Order Date :- 26.7.2021/pks

 

 

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

Recent Comments

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2024 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