High Court Court No. 67 rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by the husband's uncle and aunt, who faced charges under Sections 498A, 304B, and 120B IPC regarding the wife's strangulation death.
Application for anticipatory bail rejected; liberty to applicants denied.
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. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10368 of 2021
Applicant :- Santosh Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kirtikar Pande,Ram Autar Verma
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant application is being moved by the applicants invoking the powers of Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending their arrest in connection with Case Crime no.0030 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 304B, 120B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Fefana, District-Ballia.
From the record, it is evident that the applicants have approached this Court straightway without getting their anticipatory bail rejected from the court below.
Learned counsel for the applicants has drawn attention of the Court to Clause-7 of Section 438 Cr.P.C. (U.P. Act No.4 of 2021), which read thus :
" (7) If an application under this section has been made by any person to the High Court, no application by the same person shall be entertained by the Court of Session. "
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Vs. State of U.P. , hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned A.G.A as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P.Amendment) is not required.
Prior notice of this bail application was served in the office of Government Advocate and as per Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules and as per direction dated 20.11.2020 of this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail
Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Vs. State of U.P. , hence, this anticipatory bail application is being heard. Grant of further time to the learned AGA as per Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. (U.P.Amendment) is not required.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the present case relates to Section 304-B IPC in which the entire family of the husband-Ashish Kumar Rai has been roped in. The next submission is that the applicants are uncle and aunty of the husband having separate entity altogether.
Per contra, learned A.G.A has drawn the attention of the Court to the post mortem report that there is ligature mark around her neck. There is abrasion over her person and she died on account of asphyxia as a result of strangulation. In addition to this, it is further contended that the charge sheet has been submitted in the matter. Taking into account the totality of the circumstances that the deceased has died in unnatural way within seven years of her marriage, the applicants deserve no liberty.
Taking into account the role attributed to the applicants in commission of offence, the Court feels that in order to have indepth probe into the matter, the Investigating Officer of the case should be given fullest liberty to choose its own course for the transparent investigation.
Thus, giving a panoramic view of the matter, the Court is not inclined to exercise its powers in favour of the applicants, and thus the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected .
Order Date :- 11.8.2021 Sumit S
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to applicants apprehending arrest for offences under sections 498A, 304B and 120B IPC.
Whether the applicants' role in the death of the accused's wife within seven years of marriage warrants rejection of bail.
Whether further time should be granted to the Government Advocate for argument.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶10
Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 8072 of 2020, Govind Mishra @ Chhotu Vs. State of U.P.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Santosh Kumar And 2 Others
State Of U.P.
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
