Allowed

Harish Chandra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 May 2019BAIL/18769/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal miscellaneous bail application filed by Harish Chandra, father-in-law of deceased, alleging false implication in a dowry death case. Court granted bail after examining submissions and nature of charges.

What did the court decide?

Allowed bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, intimidate witnesses, appear in court, and refrain from similar offences.

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

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18769 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Harish Chandra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Kaushik Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged by the informant against five accused persons namely, Deepak, Pradeep, Pinki, Harishchandra and Sarla Devi alleging that the marriage of deceased Nilam was solemnized with Deepak before four years, they demanded additional dowry from the deceased for which the deceased was being tortured by them and on 1.11.2018 they killed her by setting her on fire.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is father-in-law of deceased. Co-accused Smt. Sarla Devi has already been granted bail by this Court. 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 3.11.2018 (six 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.

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let the applicant Harish Chandra involved in Case Crime No. 522 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Hathras Junction, District Hathras be released on bail on furnishing a

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 3.5.2019 A. Singh

Harish Chandra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Chandra 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of U.P.

Lal Chandra Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Chndra Pal and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahnoor Vs State of U.P.

Vinju Modanwal and Another Vs State of U.P.