Allowed

Babu Lall Nishad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Feb 2022BAIL/2680/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the father-in-law of a deceased woman accused of dowry death under Sections 498A IPC and 304-B IPC. The applicant was held to have played a general role, informed police immediately, and was a fit case for bail based on settled precedents, subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release of Babu Lall Nishad on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties on execution of strict conditions regarding interference with witnesses and attendance in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2680 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Babu Lall Nishad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saral Singh,Satyendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Nishad

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anuragh Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Saral Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Nishad, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Babu Lall Nishad under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.137 of 2021 for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Asothar, District Fatehpur, during pendency of the trial after rejecting the bail application of the applicant by the Sessions Judge, Fatehpur vide order dated 08.12.2021.

¶7

Brief facts of the case are that the first information report dated 05.09.2021 has been lodged by the father of the deceased against the applicant, his wife, husband of the deceased and Jethani (sister-in-law) of the deceased stating therein that the marriage of his daughter and co-accused Ram Singh was solemnized on 22.06.2021. On 03.09.2021 they hang his daughter for demand of dowry of some money and motorcycle.

¶8

Before lodging of the first information report an information has been given by the applicant which was endorsed in the GD No. 54 dated 03.05.2021 at about 20:38 hours, wherein it was stated that the applicant had gone to his field for doing agricultural work, his wife, also went to market for taking ration and the husband of the deceased had gone to Ghaziabad in connection with treatment of his nephew. After his return at house, it was found that his daughter-in-law committed suicide by hanging herself through her Sari from the Patra at about 03:00 P.M. An inquest proceedings of the dead body has been conducted on the aforesaid information received on 03.09.2021 at about 22:30 hours, postmortem of the body of the decease has been conducted on 04.09.2021 at about 05:30 P.M. wherein ligature mark has been found on the neck of the deceased, cause

¶9

of death has been mentioned as ante-mortem hanging.

¶10

After lodging the first information report dated 05.09.2021 at about 17:44 hours, investigation has been started and after recording the statement of prosecution witnesses charge sheet has been submitted. The applicant was arrested on 07.09.2021.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant has informed the police immediately after the incident, inquest of the body was conducted on his information. It is further submitted that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. It is further submitted that no injury except ligature mark was found on the body of deceased. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the applicant except general allegation. It is also submitted that Smt. Kalawati, mother-in-law of the deceased has been already been granted by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2021.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant also submitted that the applicant has no other previous criminal history. It is lastly submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Per contra , learned AGA has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicants and he further submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature but he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

After considering the facts of the present case it prima facie appears that;

¶15

(a) applicant is father-in-law of the deceased;

¶16

(b) No injury except one ligature mark was found on the body of the deceased;

¶17

¶18

(d) the applicant has informed the police immediately after the incident, inquest of the body was conducted on his information.

¶19

It is settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which

¶20

conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with.

¶21

Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308 , Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429 , R am Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr ., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118 , the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.

¶22

Let applicant, Babu Lall Nishad be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶23

(i) 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶24

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶25

(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.

¶26

(iv) 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 trial court.

¶27

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

¶28

(vi) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶29

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a

¶30

ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient case, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed in accordance with law.

¶31

The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance of law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment.

¶32

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶33

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶34

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶35

Order Date :- 9.2.2022 aks

¶36

Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.02.14 10:46:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Babu Lall Nishad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Lall Nishad 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

Mundar Lal Vs State of U.P.

Juvenile 'X' through His Father Vs State of Up and Anr.

Akash Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhilesh Kumar Verma Vs State of Up and 3 Others

Shahjad and Another Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Vs State of U.P.