Allowed

Shivraj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC26 Feb 2019BAIL/8051/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar, J. allowed bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving allegations of dowry death. The court observed that the applicant was falsely implicated and found it a fit case for bail without commenting on merits, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions regarding trial attendance and no tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8051 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Shivraj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicant along with certified copy of F.I.R. and copy of bail order of coaccused today in the Court, is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for applicant contended that applicant has been falsely implicated for dowry death with general allegations being father-in-law of deceased; that as per averments made in F.I.R. lodged by Babbu Pal, his daughter Chandrawati was married to Raghvendra Pal about four years ago and since after marriage she was being treated with cruelty for non fulfilment of demand of dowry; that in his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. copy at Annexure No.4, first informant has stated that deceased was beaten and treated with cruelty by her husband Raghvendra against demand of Rs.50,000/- and motorcycle and there was acquiescence of parents; that no specific role has been assigned to applicant regarding demand of dowry or treating the deceased with cruelty for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry; 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 the beneficiary of Rs.50,000/- and motorcycle allegedly demanded, as dowry; that case of applicant is distinguishable from Raghvendra, husband of deceased; that co-accused Smt. Kala Pal has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.2.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7213 of 2019, copy at S.A.1; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 8.10.2018.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of bail in this case of dowry death within 7 years of marriage.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel and perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, grant of bail to co-accused as well as totality of facts and

¶10

circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant Shivraj be released on bail in Case Crime No. 911 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali Lalitpur, District Lalitpur on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶12

(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.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶15

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 :- 26.2.2019 Tamang

Shivraj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivraj 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

Smt Naini Vs State of U.P.

Shyam Balak Ram Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Smt Maharani Vs State of U.P.

Pushpendra Vs State of U.P.

Smt Premabai Vs State of U.P.

Naresh Singh @ Narendra Singh Vs State of U.P.