Allowed

Devendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2021BAIL/7199/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed. The Court observed the absence of convincing material regarding tampering and released the applicant on bail with personal bond, two sureties, and conditions to not harass the victim, not tamper with evidence, attend court diligently, and ensure speedy trial.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

Devendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7199 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Devendra Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Prakash Singh,Avanish Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Devendra Pratap Singh seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 321 of 2019, under Section(s) 498-A, 306 I.P.C. registered at P.S.- Barra, District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant and only general allegations have been made. Submission is that the F.I.R. has been lodged with a delay of six days after consultation and there is no explanation for the same. According to the post mortem report cause of death was not specified and it is further submitted that viscera report was preserved but till date there is no report of the same at all. Contention is that the applicant has never demanded any dowry from the complainant nor had inflicted any cruelty upon the daughter of the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents as stated in para11 of the affidavit and is in jail since 28.8.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the

¶10

absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Devendra Pratap Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) 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.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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

(V) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶17

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶18

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty

¶19

to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶20

The bail application is allowed.

¶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 :- 22.2.2021 shiv

Devendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devendra Pratap Singh 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

Surendra Rao Vs State of U.P.

Harendra Alias B.P. Vs The State of U.P.

Nandan Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Bal Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Badaku Alias Manish Vs State of U.P.

Nirdosh Vs State of U.P.