Dismissed

Manpal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2019BAIL/51630/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 304-B, 498-A IPC, and Section 3/4 D.P. Act regarding alleged dowry harassment and suicide of the applicant's wife, the single judge rejected the bail prayer despite the postmortem showing poison, directing the trial court to conclude proceedings expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Bail prayer rejected. Trial directed to conclude within one year. No expressions on merits of the case.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51630 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Manpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jahar Singh (Kashyap) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Manpal, who is involved in Case Crime No. 695 of 2018, under sections 304-B, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Soron, District Kashganj.

¶7

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

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is husband of the deceased. The deceased was suffering from T.B. due to which she consumed some poisonous substance. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the deceased and has not compelled the deceased to commit suicide. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. At the time of the inquest the family members of the deceased were also present. The FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged after eight days of the alleged incident. During investigation, the investigating officer has also recorded the statements of independent witnesses Ram Autar and Rajnesh. In their statements they have stated that the deceased died due to her illness. There is no direct evidence against the applicant. There is general allegation against the applicant. It has further been submitted that the deceased herself moved an application to the superintendent of Police concerned with regard to threat and harassment by her father. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. The applicant is in jail since 30.4.2019.

¶9

Per contra; learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and argued that deceased died an unnatural death within two years of her marriage. As per postmortem report the cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained therefore,the viscera was preserved. In viscera report oregano phosphorus insecticide poison has been found to the deceased. In first information report it has been mentioned that the applicant and other coaccused used to harass and torture the deceased, demanding the Car in dowry. It has further been submitted that informant Suraj

¶10

Pal, in his statement has also supported the first information report version and has made allegation of demand of dowry against the applicant. The applicant is husband of the deceased, who is more responsible for safety and security of his wife therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶12

Consequently, the prayer for bail of the applicant Manpal is hereby refused and the bail application is rejected.

¶13

However, the trial court is directed to proceed with the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of the production of the certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶14

Order Date :- 29.11.2019/A.

Manpal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manpal 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

Manorama Vs State of U.P.

Jainuddin Nai Vs State of U.P.

Hukum Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ramu Parihar Vs State of U.P.

Shivkumari Vs State of U.P.

Surjeet Vs State of U.P.