Allowed

Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 May 2022BAIL/20323/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in a bail application held that the applicant made out a case for bail despite the seriousness of charges. The court granted bail subject to personal bond, sureties, and specific undertakings to prevent abuse of liberty and ensure presence at trial milestones.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties subject to specific conditions of attendance and non-misuse.

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

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20323 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Anil Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ansar Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This is an application for bail moved on behalf of the applicant, Anil Kumar, who is involved in Case Crime No. 161 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B and 302/34 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Basrehar, District- Etawah.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He further submits that the applicant was not present at the place of incident. His younger brother upon being called by their mother took the body off the noose and had kept her on the ground and, thereafter had approached the police. Thereafter, the applicant had reached home. It has been further submitted that for the first time in the first information report was there an allegation about the demand of dowry. Never before had any demand for dowry been made. Still further, it has been stated that in the post mortem report except the ligature mark no other injury was present in the body and the cause of death is also asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the coaccused, namely, Shera @ Sunil Kumar (Dewar) has been released on bail vide order dated 8.2.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45698 of 2021 and the mother-in-

¶8

law, namely, Suneeta has been released on bail vide order dated 23.2.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 45705 of 2021. It has been further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. Further submission is that the charge sheet has been submitted and no further investigation is required. The applicant is in jail since 20.8.2021. Therefore, if the applicant is released on bail, there is no chance of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail or tampering with the prosecution witnesses.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not deny the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and the co-accused, namely, Shera @ Sunil Kumar and Suneeta have been released on bail.

¶10

In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims, the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶11

Let the applicant, Anil Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the court.

¶13

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.

¶14

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his

¶15

counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 229A of the Indian Panel Code.

¶16

(iii) 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. be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed on such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case (ii) framing of charges and (iii) recording of statement under Section 323 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 an abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

Order Date :- 23.5.2022 PK

¶19

(Siddhartha Varma,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 2022.05.25 09:44:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalit Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Rizwan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepak Vs State of U.P.

Gajendra Singh @ Jhandu Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kinni Devi Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep@ Golu Vs State of U.P.