Allowed

Mohd. Gulamuddin @ Ghappu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Nov 2019BAIL/27573/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application allowed for the applicant, Mohd. Gulamuddin, accused in a dowry-related case involving the death of his daughter-in-law. The court, noting the applicant's lack of specific role, criminal history, and the nature of the evidence, granted bail subject to standard conditions including furnishing sureties and not tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and pressuring witnesses.

Mohd. Gulamuddin @ Ghappu Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27573 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Gulamuddin @ Ghappu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Singh,Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

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

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant. Neither he raised any demand of dowry at any point of time nor was deceased subjected to cruelty or harassment by him. Merely because the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased, he has been roped in falsely in this case by the informant. General role has been assigned in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. Cause of death of the deceased was shown in the postmortem report as ante mortem hanging. The applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 23.4.2019 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Mohd. Gulamuddin @ Ghappu involved in Case Crime No.173 of 2019 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mauranipur, District Jhansi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶10

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

¶11

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

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

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.11.2019 / ss

Mohd. Gulamuddin @ Ghappu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Gulamuddin @ Ghappu 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

Rinku Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Kalp Singh Vs State of U.P.

Vineet Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Soni Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.