Allowed

Sankata Prasad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2022BAIL/39699/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the father-in-law accused in a dowry death case involving Sections 306 and 498-A IPC, finding it fit to release him on a personal bond and sureties subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance and trial conduct.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions for court attendance and adherence to trial proceedings.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39699 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sankata Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 83 of 2022, under Sections 306, 498-A, 34 IPC, P.S. Walterganj, District Basti.

¶7

As per version of the FIR, on 30.03.2022, applicant/accused (husband) namely Satyendra Kumar gave an application at the concerned police station that his marriage was solemnized with Jesmi on 15.5.2014 and they were living happily. They slept on roof together but on 30.3.2022 at about 7.00 a.m. when the applicant woke up in the morning, he did not find his wife near him and on search found that dead body of his wife was lying inside the bedroom and the said room was locked from inside.

¶8

Thereafter, on 1.4.2022, complainant Ram Subhag lodged a written report alleging that he solemnized the marriage of his daughter Jesmi with Satyendra Kumar approximately seven years age but after marriage her father in law (The applicant here), husband Satyendra Kumar, mother in law Kriti Devi and Nanad Laxmi started to torture for demand of dowry regarding which complainant gave complaint to State Woman Commission, and other various authorities, thereafter, compromise took place and vidai was done. Thereafter, on 29.03.2022, a call came from her in-laws house that Jesmi received information on phone that the dead boy of his daughter is lying from roof. Complainant has apprehended that her in-laws and husband have committed murder of his daughter. On the basis of the said written report, initially case was registered against 05 persons under Section 498-A,302 IPC and lateron case was altered into Section 498-A, 306 IPC.

¶9

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased and resides separately from her. It is further contended that the entire family has been implicated on the allegation of demand of dowry without any substance. It is further submitted that there are general allegations with no specific role assigned. The applicant has also drawn the attention of the court towards the statement of the son of deceased wherein he has stated that deceased and his father were fighting with each other on some matters and the applicant had no role in the incident and he wants to live with his father, grand-father(applicant) and grand mother. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 30.04.2022.

¶10

Learned AGA has, however, opposed the bail application.

¶11

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations,

¶12

the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Sankata Prasad, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when 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

(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 IPC.

¶16

(iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶19

In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 3.11.2022 RavindraKSingh

¶22

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.04 16:13:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sankata Prasad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sankata Prasad 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

Prahlad Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Deepak Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dilip Vs State of U.P.

Riyasat Vs State of U.P.

Ekta Vs State of U.P.

Lokesh Som Vs State of U.P.