Allowed

Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2021BAIL/6126/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge dismissed objections and granted bail to the applicant involved in a dowry harassment and suicide case. Bail was secured with conditions for prompt trial, attendance, and omission of false adjournments, including strategies to handle the lack of court infrastructure.

What did the court decide?

Release on personal bond without sureties till court functioning is restored, with strict conditions for attendance and trial procedure, subject to supplying sureties within a month.

Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6126 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raja Ram Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Sri Sunil Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Raja Ram Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sunil Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 119 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police StationKhanna, District- Mahoba is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial. The applicant is in jail since 1.10.2020.

¶8

Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant, who is an old man aged about 60 years, was falsely roped in the case by attributing general role of dowry harassment of the deceased. The deceased got married with the son of the applicant about six year and eight months back and during this period there was no complaint or demand of any dowry. She has committed suicide by hanging herself and the cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court to the Pariwar Register which shows that the applicant and his wife have distinct separate unit. Moreover, there is a demand of motorcycle and golden chain and the best beneficiary of these articles would be the husband.

¶9

Learned A.G.A as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the totality of the circumstances and the inter se relationship of deceased with the applicant, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of

¶11

the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha , who is involved in Case Crime No. 119 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police StationKhanna, District- Mahoba, be released on bail on his furnishing 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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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 I.P.C.

¶15

(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 I.P.C.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶20

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶21

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶22

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 28.1.2021

¶25

Vikas

Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha 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

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jugendra Vs State of Up

Serazuddin Vs State of U.P.

Ishaq Ali Vs State of U.P.

Hari Kishan @ Hari Vs State of U.P.

Surjeet Singh Vs State of U.P.