Single judge granted bail to the applicant, a father-in-law of the deceased, charged withSection 498-A and302 IPC. The court found no ground to oppose bail at this stage without commenting on merits.
Application granted; applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5323 of 2019
Applicant :- Chanchal Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant has been falsely implicated being father-in-law of deceased; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged on 9.4.2018 by brother of deceased, his sister Sona was married to co-accused Mintu about 07 years back, but was being treated with cruelty for non fulfilment of demand of Rs.1,00,000/- and bullet motorcycle, as dowry and was strangulated to death by her husband, in-laws and made evidence disappear; that applicant neither made any demand of dowry nor treated deceased with cruelty for non fulfilment of demand of dowry; that applicant may not be beneficiary of Rs.1,00,000/- and bullet motorcycle allegedly demanded, as dowry; that applicant was living separately in another village Amwadiger Kushinagar, Amawa Diger, U.P., while deceased was living with her husband at Rampur Barhan Tola Parorahi; that there appears to be dispute between husband and wife and due to which, resulted in death of Sona and after her death, funeral was done by her husband without informing to person of her maika ; that upon postmortem of remaining bones after lightening of pyre, cause of death could not be detected; that applicant has not made any evidence disappear; that case of applicant is distinguishable from Mintu, husband; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 15.4.2018.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Chanchal Yadav be released on bail in Case Crime No.29 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 302, 201,34 IPC
and 3/4 D.P. Act P.S. Barwa Patti, District Kushinagar on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. Order Date :- 20.2.2019 Tamang
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is a fit case for bail considering the severity of punishment and complicity in the alleged crime.
Chanchal Yadav
Harsh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
