Court granted bail to Vaibhav Jaiswal charged with dowry death and murder, accepting medical evidence of deceased's depression, with instructions to furnish bond and sureties and adhere to trial conditions.
Release on bail by executing personal bond and two sureties in the required amount subject to trial attendance and non-interference conditions.
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. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3654 of 2021
Applicant :- Vaibhav Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajrshi Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhuwan Raj
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard Sri Dileep Kumar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bhuwan Raj, learned counsel for the informant through video conferencing, learned A.G.A. who is present in the Court and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 319 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B, 201 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Civil Lines, district-Prayagraj, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
The first information report was lodged by the informant against Vaibhav Jaiswal (husband), Mukul Jaiswal (father-inlaw) Smt. Lalni Jaiswal (mother-in-law) of the daughter (deceased) of the informant, alleging therein that he had performed marriage of his daughter Sweta Jaiswal with present accused after spending about twenty lacs rupees. It was also alleged in the FIR that after marriage the in-laws of the daughter of the complainant were not happy with the dowry and demanded Rs. 20,000,00/- (twenty lacs) and a Maruti Wagon-R car as additional dowry. When the daughter of the informant used to visit her parental home she narrates such things to her parents. It was also alleged in the FIR that on 23.7.2020 the inlaws of the daughter informed the complainant about disappearance of her daughter and later on her dead body was found from the river Yamuna. It was also mentioned in the FIR
that after committing the murder of the daughter of the complainant her husband and in-laws had thrown her body into river Yamuna. After lodging of the FIR the investigation was proceeded and after completion of investigation the mother-inlaw and father-in-law of the deceased were exonerated from the charge and the husband of the deceased has been chargesheeted by the police.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by his in-laws, only to harass him and to extract money from his parents. He next submits that the applicant had given information to the police about disappearance of his wife/deceased in the evening of 23.7.2020. The mobile phone of the deceased was found by the police at the site of the incident, from where she jumped into river Yamuna. She was seen jumping into the river by independent witness Shakeel and in this regard the police has recordced his statement, which is annexed as Annexure-XVIII to the affidavit accompanying bail application. He also submits that the deceased was suffering from mental disorder and her treatment was going on for sometime, copy of prescription of various doctors has been annexed as Annexure-ii to the affidavit accompanying the bail application, which indicates that the deceased was in depression. In this regard the Investigation Officer has also recorded the statement of the doctors, which are also annexed from page 161 onwards, which clearly shows that the deceased was given medicines for depression and mental disorder.
He lastly submits that the applicant, who is in jail since 4.10.2020 and has no criminal antecedents to his credit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant
have opposed the prayer for bail but have not denied the authenticity of the medical prescriptions, which are annexed with the file.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Let the applicant, Vaibhav Jaiswal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably
Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 24.6.2021 Faridul
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vaibhav Jaiswal
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
