Allowed

Abhishek Vats v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2021BAIL/33107/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal judge granted bail to applicant Abhishek Vats accused under Sections 498A, 307, 323, 506 IPC. Court found it a fit case for bail despite alleged matrimonial dispute, without commenting on merits, imposing strict conditions on attendance and trial conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding attendance and conduct during trial.

Abhishek Vats Vs State of U.P. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33107 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Abhishek Vats Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Nitika Gupta,Akash Tomar,Alka Pandey,Kuldeep Singh Tomar,Umair Mahmood,Vinod Kumar Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kuldeep Singh Tomar,Sufia Saba

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Akash Tomar and Sri Vinod Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 175 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 307, 323, 506 IPC, at Police Station Charthawal, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the incident took place on 16.6.2021 whereas the FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged on 18.6.2021. There is delay of two days in lodging the FIR but no satisfactory explanation has been given for the same. It has further been submitted that the applicant is husband of the complainant. As per medical report the injury of injured are simple in nature. It has further been submitted that the marriage between the applicant and informant was solemnized and from their wedlock there are two children. It has further been submitted that there is a matrimonial dispute between the applicant and the informant. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the informant.He has further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 27.6.2021.

¶8

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Abhishek Vats, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing

¶11

a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶17

In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order Date :- 9.12.2021

¶20

Abhishek Vats v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Vats 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

Sonam Verma Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Babloo @ Ramgopal Vs State of U.P.

Afzal Quraishi @ Singham Vs State of U.P.

Sagar Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Gopal Vs Union of India