Allowed

Nitin v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2022BAIL/4224/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed by the husband arrested for dowry harassment and dowry death charges regarding his wife's suicide. The court found merit in the submissions that the prosecution failed to dispute the lack of criminal history and released the applicant with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in an amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

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

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4224 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Nitin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Nazam,Abdul Majeed,Jamaluddin Mohd. Nasir,Sufia Saba Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhishek Yadav,Rajeev Pandey,Tulsi Singh Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.87 of 2021 at Police Station-Purkazi, DistrictMuzaffar Nagar under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Sections 3/4 of the D.P.Act. The applicant is in jail since 08.05.2021.

¶6

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffar Nagar on 10.01.2022.

¶7

Ms.Sufia Saba, learned counsel assisted by Shri Muhassir Majeed, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. The relationship between the applicant and the deceased were harmonious. The applicant never demanded dowry or tortured the deceased. The applicant is bereaved by death of his wife. The applicant and his family members suffered from Covid-19 pandemic at the peak of the second wave. The entire family had to leave the

¶8

village and go into isolation due to social pressure. They also suffered severe financial reverses. A number of persons who were known to the applicant and his family had succumbed to the Covid-19 pandemic. The deceased was of a sensitive nature. At the relevant point in time, the deceased was left all alone to face to the Covid-19 pandemic. The family was also rendered financial destitute. The deceased suffered from depression. On the fateful day, the deceased was succumbed to depression and took the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. The post mortem report opines that the death of the victim was caused by asphyxia as the result of ante mortem hanging. No antemortem injuries apart from the ligature marks have been found on the body of the deceased. The said ligature marks are consistent with the hanging. No abnormality was detected in the hyoid bone. The applicant was not present at the house when the incident happened. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶9

Shri Indra Prakash Srivastava, learned A.G.A. as well as Shri Abhishek Yadav, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the

¶10

aforesaid submissions from the record. They, however, do not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶11

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶12

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant-Nitin be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶14

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the

¶17

evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 11.7.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶19

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.07.12 13:58:52 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nitin v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin 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

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Chameli Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Gupta Vs State of Up.

Sonu @ Awdhesh Vs State of U.P.

Arshad Hussain @ Arshad Shairi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others