Partly allowed

Rinku @ Rahul Verma and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Sept 2020ABAIL/4436/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was rejected for Rinku Verma charged with dowry offenses, while Ankit Verma, falsely implicated in rape allegations, was granted bail on bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to Ankit Verma on personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of like amount; bail conditioned on cooperation with investigation and no tampering with evidence.

Rinku @ Rahul Verma and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4436 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rinku @ Rahul Verma And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Mohd. Akbar Shah Alam Khan, learned counsel for the applicants; Sri Saurabh Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and; learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants – Rinku @ Rahul Verma and Ankit Verma seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 69 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 323, 376, 511, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station – Mahila Thana, District – Muzaffar Nagar , during the pendency of trial.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by husband and brother-in-law of the informant (opposite party no.2). Keeping in mind the nature of allegations made against the applicant no.1, with respect to dowry, the anticipatory bail application filed on his behalf is lacking in merit, inasmuch as, no discretion may be exercised in such matters against the husband, against whom the main accusation of dowry has been made.

¶8

Insofar as the applicant no.1 - Rinku @ Rahul Verma is conerned, the anticipatory bail application is rejected.

¶9

Insofar as the applicant no. 2 is concerned, against whom allegation of attempt to rape is made, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that wholly false and frivolous allegation had been made against the applicant no.2 only to cause deep harassment to him and and his other family members by seeking his arrest solely on account of the fact that he is a close family member of applicant no.1. The real dispute is the matrimonial discord between the opposite party no.2 and applicant no.1 in which applicant no.2 has

¶10

been falsely roped in.

¶11

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present application pending or calling for counter affidavit at this stage. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant no.2 is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

In the event of arrest of applicant no.2- Ankit Verma involved in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail during investigation, on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned on the following conditions:

¶13

(i) The applicant no.2 shall make him available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶14

(ii) The applicant no.2 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

(iii) The applicant no.2 shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court.

¶16

(iv) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant no.2.

¶17

Accordingly, the present application is disposed of in respect of applicant no.2.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.9.2020 Prakhar

Rinku @ Rahul Verma and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rinku @ Rahul Verma and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Chandra Shekhar Singh Azad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Komal Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

C/M Madarsa Gauisya Habibul Madaris and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dharmendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Lavkush Lodhi Rajpur and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neeraj and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another