Allowed

Aamir v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2022ABAIL/10735/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to the applicant in a dowry opposition case involvingIPC and Dowry Prohibition Act charges. The court relied on Sushila Aggarwal and imposed standard bail conditions, clarifying that this order does not prejudice the trial court's independent opinion.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding availability, no tampering/collusion, no leaving India, and appearance in trial court.

Aamir Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10735 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Aamir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 79 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Section 3/4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, Police Station Daurala, District Meerut, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant along with other coaccused persons is stated to have subjected the informant to cruelty for the demand of dowry and is also stated to have assaulted her and administered triple talaq.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case being the husband of the informant who is living with her parents and the present case has been filed without any evidence with regard to administering triple talaq.

¶9

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶11

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of " Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 ", the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Aamir involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

¶14

that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶17

that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶18

that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶19

that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

¶21

It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory 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.

¶22

Order Date :- 6.12.2022 SA

¶23

Digitally signed by SALMAN ALI Date: 2022.12.08 10:12:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aamir v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aamir v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Guljar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Verma @ Sachin Singh Vs State of U.P.

Salman and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Narayan Das Prajapati Vs State of U.P.and Another

Jahangir Vs State of U.P. and Another