Allowed

Shiv Swaroop @ Pappu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Feb 2019BAIL/8591/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application in a dowry death case under Sections 498-A and 304-B I.P.C. The applicant contested the false implication. The court, considering complicity based nature and seriousness of punishment granted bail on personal bond and sureties at this stage without commenting on merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond and two sureties on furnishing of personal bond and two sureties in equal amount.

Shiv Swaroop @ Pappu Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8591 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Swaroop @ Pappu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Puneet Bhadauria Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶5

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

¶6

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 on 25.4.2018, marriage of his sister Mona was solemnized with Vikas on 6.5.2017 and since after marriage she was being treated with cruelty for non-fulfilment of demand of Rs.2 Lacs and a motorcycle and Doli, younger sister of deceased had been called by deceased, who telephonically informed on 24.4.2018 that husband of Mona and her Sas, Sasur and Nanad have caused her death after pouring kerosene on her and putting her on fire resulting in death of Mona; that no specific role has been assigned to applicant regarding demand of dowry or treating deceased with cruelty for nonfulfilment of demand of dowry; that applicant neither made any demand of dowry nor treated deceased with cruelty for nonfulfilment of demand of dowry; that applicant may not be beneficiary of Rs. 2 Lacs and motorcycle allegedly demanded, as dowry; that applicant is labour class person carrying on cycle repairing shop in roadside hut where he was residing inside hut and came upon information of accidental burn injuries to deceased; that applicant had no motive to cause death of deceased; that following dispute between husband and wife, deceased appears to have committed suicide; that case of applicant is distinguishable with husband of deceased; that coaccused Pinki (Nanad) has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.12.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.47104 of 2018, copy at Annexure-7; that applicant has no criminal history; that applicant undertakes that he will not misuse liberty of bail; that applicant is in custody since 12.9.2018.

¶7

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

¶8

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

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

(i) The applicant will co-operate with 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.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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.

¶15

Order Date :- 28.2.2019 Kpy

Shiv Swaroop @ Pappu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Swaroop @ Pappu 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

Shani Kumar Kardam Vs State of U.P.

Vimla Devi Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Vs State of U.P.

Mahaveer Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Ram Murti Vs State of U.P.

Sriram Upadhyay Vs State of U.P.