Allowed

Suraj Pal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Apr 2019BAIL/17381/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed for applicant impugned in a dowry death case. The court held it a fit case for bail despite the gravity of offences, noting lack of independent evidence against the applicant and his clean criminal record, subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to specific conditions precedent.

Suraj Pal Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17381 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Suraj Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikash Chandra Tiwari,Ashutosh Tripathi

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged by the informant against six accused persons namely, Gajendra Singh Gautam, Surajpal, Rekha, Neeraj, Nema and Madhu alleging that the marriage of deceased Mithilesh was solemnized with Gajendra Singh Gautam on 29.4.2012, they demanded dowry as rupees two lacs from the deceased for which the deceased was being tortured by them and on 24.10.2018 they killed her by setting her on fire.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is the father-in-law of deceased. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is general allegations against the applicant. There is no independent witness and no legal evidence against the applicant. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present matter. He has no concern with the demand of dowry and he is not beneficiary of the same. Applicant has no concern with deceased and her husband. He is living separately. Deceased has committed suicide herself. He is languishing in jail since 23.12.2018 (more than four months) having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Suraj Pal involved in Case Crime No. 533 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Jalesar, District Etah be released

¶12

on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶13

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

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

¶17

5.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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 25.4.2019

¶20

A. Singh

Suraj Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishna @ Krishna Prasad Modanwal Vs State of U.P.

Urmila Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Tara Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mohd .Sabir Vs State of U.P.

Umesh @ Kajariya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sudha @ Rubi Vs State of U.P.