Allowed

Shrawan Kushwaha v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 Nov 2022BAIL/50460/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a criminal bail application filed by Shrawan Kushwaha in a case involving charges of dowry death and cruelty. Finding that specific allegations against the applicant are absent, the cause of death shows hanging without other injuries, and he has no criminal history, the court was of the prima facie view that a case for bail is made out. The applicant was released on a personal bo

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding court appearance and filing an undertaking against seeking adjournments.

Shrawan Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50460 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shrawan Kushwaha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Monu Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Applicant- Shrawan Kushwaha seeks bail in Case Crime No. 116 of 2021, under Section 498-A,304-B IPC and 3/4 of D.P.Act. P.S. Jatahan Bazar, DistrictKushinagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant's son Sandeep was married to the deceased in the year 2019, however, on account of matrimonial discord, the present F.I.R. has been lodged.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant has never demanded any additional dowry from the deceased nor had ever tortured, maltreated or subjected her to cruelty for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. Even as the per the allegations made in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. the first informant himself has stated that on account of non-fulfilment of demand of dowry her husband Sandeep used to torture her. There is no specific allegation against the applicant.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of first informant recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. in which it has been categorically stated that on the

¶11

date of incident there was some quarrel between husband and wife and on account of said quarrel the victim had committed suicide and the applicant absolutely has no role to play in the said incident.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn attention of the Court to the post mortem report wherein Doctor has noted the cause of death to be asphyxia as a result of hanging. Except ligature mark, there is no other injury on the person of the deceased.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 15.6.2022 and the charge sheet has already been submitted and he has no criminal history to his credit. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the evidence as such prima facie a case for bail is made out.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶15

Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of record, it is evident that the applicant has never demanded any additional dowry from the deceased nor had ever tortured, maltreated or subjected her to cruelty for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. Even as the per the allegations made in the F.I.R. as well as in the statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. the first informant himself has stated that on account of non-fulfilment of demand of dowry her husband Sandeep used to torture her. There is no specific allegation against the applicant. In the statement of first informant recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. it has been categorically stated that on the date of incident there was some quarrel between husband and wife and on account of said quarrel the victim had committed suicide and the applicant absolutely has no role to play in the said incident. As per the post mortem report the Doctor has noted the cause of death to be asphyxia as a result of hanging. Except ligature mark, there is no other injury on the person of the deceased. The

¶16

applicant has further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 15.6.2022 and the charge sheet has already been submitted and he has no criminal history to his credit. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering the evidence. In the backdrop of the said facts and circumstances prima facie a case for bail is made out.

¶17

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

¶18

(1). 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 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.

¶19

(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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶20

(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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 shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶21

(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, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient 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.

¶22

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶23

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶24

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶25

The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶26

Order Date :- 30.11.2022 R

¶27

Digitally signed by RAM ASARE MORYA Date: 2022.12.01 17:08:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shrawan Kushwaha v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrawan Kushwaha 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anwari Begum Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Ankush Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Prabhat Saini Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Suryabhan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ramsurat @ Jangali Vs State of U.P.