Allowed

Kulvinder Singh Bhasin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Nov 2022ABAIL/2691/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed anticipatory bail application for applicant in case allegedly involving dowry harassment. Held that case for anticipatory bail is made out without expressing opinion on merits, subject to furnishing bond and complying with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed; release on bail upon arrest subject to personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties.

Kulvinder Singh Bhasin Vs State of U.P. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2691 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Kulvinder Singh Bhasin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 124 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323 and 406 IPC, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Gautam Budh Nagar, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. Before marrying each other, the applicant and the complainant were divorcee and they have married each other on 29.04.2021. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that allegations regarding harassment of complainant made against the applicant, are thoroughly false. There is no injury report of the complainant to show that she has sustained any injury. It is submitted that applicant is aged about 52 years, whereas the complainant is aged 46-47 years. It was stated that in fact the complainant was having old medical history and after marriage with applicant she has not sustained any injury at the hands of applicant. Learned counsel submitted that the essentially the

¶8

matter pertains to matrimonial dispute. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.

¶10

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶11

In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶12

The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Kulvinder Singh Bhasin in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned/Court below

¶14

concerned with the following conditions :-

¶15

(i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required;

¶16

(ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

(iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶18

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶19

Order Date :- 24.11.2022 A. Tripathi

¶20

Digitally signed by AKHILESH TRIPATHI Date: 2022.11.25 16:44:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kulvinder Singh Bhasin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulvinder Singh Bhasin 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Himanshu Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Purnima Keshari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nandram Vs State of U.P.

Sagir Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ahmad Hasan Vs State of U.P. and Another