Dismissed
Vijay Shankar Chaudhary v. State of U.P.
Allahabad HCBAIL/2039/2020
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
What the court decided
AI extract
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
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. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2039 of 2020
Applicant :- Vijay Shankar Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Prakash Dwivedi,Kalp Nath,Vivekanand Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant through virtual mode as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.122 of 2019, under Section 498A, 304B, 201 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Ahraura, DistrictMirzapur is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is husband of the deceased. The next submission is that deceased got married on 28.03.2016 and on account of scanty dowry, the lady was treated as second rate citizen by her husband(the applicant). Frustrated by this, she has committed suicide under unnatural circumstances. It is borne out from the record that there was a consistent stand that she was subject matter of dowry related harassment and perturbed by this, she has committed suicide. Being husband, it is onerous responsibility of the husband to take good care of his wife as there is presumption against the husband and Section 113-A of Indian Evidence Act would fall against the husband. Not only she died, but her husband and her in-laws disposed of her body in a clandestine way without any inquest or post mortem and that is why they are charged under section 201 IPC.
Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and inter se relationship of the applicant with the deceased, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant.
Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected.
Order Date :- 1.7.2021 Sumit S
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail applicant should be granted enlargement on bail given the nature of dowry death and suicide-related charges.
Whether the presumption under Section 113-A of the Indian Evidence Act weighs against granting bail to the husband in this case.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Vijay Shankar Chaudhary
Rahul Chaturvedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court