Allowed

Jaiprakash v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2022ABAIL/11303/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the court granted bail to the applicant accused of cruelty and dowry harassment, applying the Apex Court judgment in Sushila Aggarwal, while noting it would not affect the trial court's independent opinion.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions of appearing in court and not tampering with evidence.

Jaiprakash Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11303 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jaiprakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pravin Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Pravin Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Smt. Ladli Pandey, 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 F.I.R./Case Crime No. 106 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gautam Budh Nagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶7

As per prosecution story, the applicant, who is the husband of the informant, is stated to have subjected the informant to cruelty for demand of dowry.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel has further stated that admittedly, the matter is of family discord. As per the allegations, the applicant had confined the informant to a single room and is stated to have disconnected the water connection of her room. Learned counsel has also stated that no allegation of Section 498-A IPC is made out as per the allegations levelled in the FIR. 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.

¶9

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.

¶10

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.

¶11

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 .

¶12

In the event of arrest of the applicant, Jaiprakash involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail 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:-

¶13

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

¶14

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;

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.12.2022 Siddhant

¶22

Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.12.01 17:37:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jaiprakash v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaiprakash 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

Mahendra @ Mahendra Rathor Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Kumar Srivastava and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anis Husain Khan @ Anis Hasan Kahn and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Ishwar Singh Vs State of U.P and Another