Allowed

Satpal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Apr 2022BAIL/2259/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application regarding a dowry death case, the Court granted bail to the applicant (husband). The Court, noting the deceased was corona positive and died due to the pandemic, prima facie found a case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for bail is granted; the applicant shall be released on bail subject to conditions regarding court appearances and penalties for absconding under IPC Sections 229-A and 174-A.

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

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2259 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Satpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Khanna,Amber Khanna Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vivek Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 170 of 2021 under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act, Police Station - Naugawan Sadat, District - Amroha with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

The FIR of this incident was lodged against the in-laws of the daughter of First Informant Babu Ram. The mention in the FIR is that in the marriage of his daughter on 17.12.2018 dowry was sufficiently given, but her husband Satpal and other members of his family were not satisfied with the dowry what was offered them in the marriage. They started harassing and torturing the daughter of the first informant. On the morning of 12.05.2021 her husband Satpal came and took her back. Thereafter, next day on 13.05.2021 at about 10:00 A.M. the son of first informant, namely, Krishna Nand received an information on phone call made by the real bahnoyee (brother-in-law) of the daughter of the first informant that his sister was killed in night by Khacheru, Kunta Devi and Satpal Singh altogether and her dead body too had been cremated at 4:00 o' clock in the morning. Then, a call was made to Satpal Singh who said that Suman was seriously ill and he had gone to Bijnor for medicines. Then, the First Informant said to have a talk with Suman, but the call was disconnected.

¶8

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the present accused applicant is husband and is languishing in jail since 14.05.2021 without any rhyme or reason because the deceased has died due to corona infection, the R.T.P.C.R. report of the deceased, which is on page No. 44. The said report clearly shows that the deceased was found to be corona positive on 30.04.2021. Further argument is that the deceased was given treatments and at that time Covid-19 pandemic was very pernicious being at its peak and no doctors were ready to admit or attend such patients. That's why she died and the present accused has cremated her dead body because he was not permitted to carry the dead body of his wife being corona positive out to Asmasaan Ghat etc. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 14.05.2021 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. as well as Shri Vivek Sharma, learned counsel for first informant has opposed the prayer for bail. But they could not dispute the fact that the deceased was corona positive.

¶10

Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, having

¶11

considered the admitted fact that the deceased died due to corona, having considered the period of detention of the applicant and considering all other attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.

¶12

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Satpal involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in Court. 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;

¶15

(2). 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 Penal Code;

¶16

(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(4). The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

Order Date :- 21.4.2022 LBY

¶19

Digitally signed by LAL BAHADUR YADAV Date: 2022.04.28 11:36:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satpal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satpal 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

Jai Kishan Bharti Vs the State of U.P. and Another

Dan Sahay and Another Vs State of U.P.

Brijnath Singh Vs State of U.P.and Another

Dilip Sahani Vs State of U.P.

Kamal Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P.