Allowed

Virendra Kumar Patel v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2022BAIL/13016/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Additional Judge, Prayagraj allowed the bail application of Virendra Kumar Patel, the husband of a deceased woman in a case under Sections 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail after evaluating the circumstances of the case, including the post-mortem report findings, and prescribed standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and appearance in the trial court.

Virendra Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13016 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Patel Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Roy Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Verma

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.207 of 2021 at Police Station-Phoolpur, District-Varanasi under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act. The applicant is in jail since 04.07.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Varanasi on 25.11.2021.

¶7

Shri Pankaj Roy, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. The applicant is bereaved by the death of his wife. He prays for peace of the departed soul. However, for the purpose of the bail application, it is submitted that the wife of the applicant was a very sensitive nature lady who was prone to extreme reactions even on trivial issues. The family of the deceased was passing through difficult times on account of financial reverses

¶8

suffered during Covid 19 pandemic. The applicant too was depressed by the financial destitution of the family and hit the bottle. On the fateful day, the deceased was succumbed to depression and committed suicide. The applicant never harassed the deceased or demanded any dowry. Their relationship were harmonious. One child was born in their wedlock. The child is without a guardian on account of incarceration of the applicant and death of his mother. The post mortem report opines that the death was caused by asphyxia as the result of ante mortem hanging. The hyoid bone was intact. There was a ligature mark around the neck of the deceased with the gap of 3 c.m. The aforesaid findings in the post mortem report independently corroborate that the deceased died due to hanging. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶9

Shri Nafees Ahmad, learned A.G.A. and Shri Anil Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. They, however, do not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶10

I see merit in the submissions of the learned

¶11

counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant-Virendra Kumar Patel 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 subject to following conditions.

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶18

Order Date :- 5.7.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶19

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.07.06 13:08:35 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Virendra Kumar Patel v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Kumar Patel 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

Seema Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Surendra Vs State of U.P. Thr Pri. Sec. Home Govt. of U.P.

Shantiswaroop Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another