SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Umesh vs State Of U.P. on 14 January, 2020


?Court No. – 68

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 49421 of 2019

Applicant :- Umesh

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Rinki Gupta,Narendra Kumar Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.

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

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is husband of the deceased. The marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased in the year 2012. The incident has taken place after seven years of their marriage. Initially the FIR of the alleged incident was lodged under section 498A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. During the investigation the case was converted under section 306 IPC. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. Neither the applicant has harassed or tortured the deceased nor he has made any additional demand of dowry. There is one son from the wedlock of the deceased and applicant. In the statement of Manoj Kumar Thakur, who is neighbour of the applicant it has come that some quarrel has taken place in between the applicant and his wife. The applicant came out from his house thereafter his wife (deceased) set herself on fire after pouring kerosene oil when the person of neighbour and husband of the deceased came to know about the alleged incident and they rushed at the house of the applicant. It has further been submitted that the applicant tried to save the deceased due to which he also sustained 30% burn injury. The applicant also remained hospitalized. It has further been submitted that the applicant has not compelled the deceased to commit suicide. There is no cogent evidence with regard to abatement. It has further been submitted that there is no dying declaration of the deceased. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. False allegation has been made against the applicant.There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 11.9.2019.

Per contra, learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Umesh involved in Case Crime No. 246 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 306, IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Saurikh, District Kannoj be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.

2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate with the trial.

3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

Order Date :- 14.1.2020/A.



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