Allowed

Darshan Lal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2022BAIL/47658/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to applicant Darshan Lal in a trial case under Section 306 IPC regarding alleged abetment to suicide. Bench observed lack of direct nexus between applicant's act and death and no reason to believe he would abscond.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties and complying with conditions regarding trial conduct and evidence tampering.

Darshan Lal Vs State of U.P. — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47658 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Darshan Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rama Shankar Mishra,Amlesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Amlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the accused/applicant, Shri Ajeet Singh, as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Darshan Lal for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 117 of 2021, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Didarganj, District Azamgarh, during trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has falsely been implicated in the instant case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶8

It is further submitted that the FIR of the incident has been lodged on 26.8.2021 by the mother of the deceased Pramila Devi alleging that her daughter Aradhana was married to applicant about 11 years before the incident and four children were also born out of this wedlock. However, since June, 2021, the applicant had developed illicit relations with one woman and started subjecting the deceased with cruelty and also physical assault and on 24.8.2021 on being humiliated and assaulted by the applicant and his mother Sonmati the deceased had committed suicide by hanging herself. In the postmortem report a ligature mark has been found around the neck of the deceased and her death stated to have occurred due to asphyxia on account of ante mortem injury.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant, as per the admission of the prosecution, was married with the deceased about 11 years before the incident. They had four children out of this wedlock and were living a happily married life. However, the deceased had developed a suspicion and doubt that the applicant is having illicit relations with another woman and despite being persuaded and explained the deceased had committed suicide on the basis of non existent apprehension.

¶10

While drawing the attention of this Court towards the statements of three sisters of the deceased recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., namely, Sadhana, Vandana and Ranjana, it is vehemently submitted that all theses three sisters of the deceased had stated that the applicant and deceased were living a happy married life, however, for last few days before the incident the deceased had developed a suspicion that the applicant is having illicit relations with one woman and that was the cause of confrontation between them and on the fateful day the applicant had scolded the deceased, whereupon she had committed suicide.

¶11

It is vehemently submitted that the deceased was only having illusion and suspicion, without any basis, that the applicant is having an affair or illicit relations with other woman and there is no direct nexus between any act of the applicant and the commission of the suicide by the deceased which appears to be a result of suspicion without any basis. The applicant is in jail in this case since 28.8.2021 and he is not having any criminal history and there is no apprehension that the accused-applicant after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶12

Learned counsel for the informant, however, vehemently opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that it was only due to the illicit relations of the applicant with another woman the deceased feels humiliated and has committed suicide and thus there is direct nexus between the act of the applicant and suicide committed by the deceased.

¶13

Learned AGA has also chosen to oppose the prayer of bail of the applicant that the applicant is an accused of heinous offence and therefore he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is an admitted case to the parties that the applicant and deceased were married 11 years before the incident. They also had four children out of this wedlock and was living a happy married life. The story as is reflected from the statement of the three sisters of the deceased, namely, Shadhana, Ranjana and Vandana is to the tune that from few days before the incident the deceased had developed a suspicion that the applicant is having illicit relations with another woman and on the fateful day she was scolded by the applicant and therefore committed suicide. While referring to Section 306 and 107 of the IPC it is vehemently submitted that the abetment has been defined under Section 107 of the IPC and the applicant has not done any act which may fall under Section 107 of the IPC and it is only on the basis of some baseless

¶15

illusion and doubt and apprehension the deceased appears to have committed suicide and thus 306 IPC could not be attracted.

¶16

Perusal of the postmortem report would also reveal that a ligature mark has been found around the neck of the deceased and apart from this injury no other injury has been found which may correspond to physical assault. The applicant is in jail in this case since 28.8.2021. The presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶17

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer for bail but could not dispute the other factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶18

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶19

Let the applicant- Darshan Lal involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶25

Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case.

¶26

Order Date :- 12.4.2022 Muk

¶27

Digitally signed by MOHD UMAR KHAN Date: 2022.04.12 17:33:08 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Darshan Lal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan Lal 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

Dhanraj Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vindeshwari Sonker and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akbar Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Tiwari @ Ratnesh Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Amit Vs State of U.P.

Ishendra Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another