Allowed

Satveer v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 May 2022BAIL/21621/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed bail to Satveer in a matrimonial dispute involving culpable homicide not amounting to murder and 498-A, recognizing the applicant has no criminal history and the chargesheet has been submitted without further investigation required.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions to prevent abuse of liberty.

Satveer Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21621 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Satveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey 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, Satveer, who is involved in Case Crime No. 422 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Kutubsher, District- Saharanpur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is further contended that the occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 6.11.2020, whereas, FIR was lodged on 9.11.2020 after a great delay of 3 days and no explanation of the same has been given by the prosecution. It is further contended that when the deceased initially got burnt; it was her husband and her fatherin-law who were taken into hospital; that they were also present at the time of inquest. Still further it was argued that there was no other injury. It is further submitted that as per the statement of the doctor there was no evidence of the deceased being burnt by kerosine etc. It has, therefore, been argued that the deceased was burnt because of the candle which had fallen on her. It is further submitted that the applicant is father-in-law. The chargesheet has been submitted in the case and no further investigation is required by the police. It is further submitted that the applicant has no other criminal history and is in jail since 10.11.2020 and if he is released on bail, there is no chance of his absconding or misusing the liberty of bail or tampering

¶8

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. He also did not deny that the charge sheet had been submitted.

¶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

The bail application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant, Satveer be released on bail in Case Crime No. 422 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Kutubsher, DistrictSaharanpur on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

(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.

¶14

In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as an abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶15

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A 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

¶17

proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and 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.

¶18

(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 313 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.

¶19

Order Date :- 30.5.2022 vkj

¶20

Digitally signed by VIJAY KRISHNA JAISWAL Date: 2022.05.31 17:14:48 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satveer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satveer v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alok Kushwaha Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Haushila Rajbhar Vs state of up thru principal secretary home at lucknow

Savindra @ Kartik Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Milan Mandal Vs State of U.P.

Indu Devi Vs State of U.P.

Raj Vs State of U.P. and Another