Allowed

Vikas Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jun 2022BAIL/8670/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to Vikas Gupta, an accused in a criminal case involving Section 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act charges. The court noted the informant's weakened prosecution in cross-examination and bail granted to co-accused, holding it a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail by executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties.

Vikas Gupta Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 46

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8670 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vikas Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant in connection with Case Crime No.86 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Rajapur, district Chitrakoot.

¶7

As per prosecution version, the F.I.R. of the present case was lodged by one Ram Babu Gupta, brother of the deceased Smt. Geeta Devi on 11.4.2021 for the offence under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act at Police Station Rajapur, district Chitrakoot against the accused Vikas Gupta (husband of the deceased) and his family members (names not known) with the allegation that the marriage of his sister (deceased) was solemnized with the applicant ten months prior to the alleged incident and after marriage the accused persons have tortured and harassed the deceased for the demand of additional dowry.

¶8

The first and foremost argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that PW-1 Ram Babu Gupta, who is the brother and informant of the case has been examined before the trial court and in his cross-examination he has not supported the prosecution case and stated that the F.I.R. of the present case was written by an unknown person, who was present in the police station and he has only signed on the said F.I.R. He further stated in the cross-examination that her sister-deceased was suffering from severe pain in her stomach and on account of which she was mentally ill and disturbed and the husband and in-laws of the deceased were made best efforts for her treatment. PW-1 also deposed that the applicant

¶9

and his family members have never demanded a motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- as an additional dowry. Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that the co-accused of this case namely, Suman @ Suman Devi and Laxmi Devi have already been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this vide orders dated 26.10.2021 and 29.11.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No. 34124 of 2021 and 34239 of 2021 respectively and on the ground of parity, the applicant, who is the husband, is entitled to be released on bail. Learned counsel for the applicant urged that according to the postmortem examination report, the cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained and the viscera was preserved, but till date no report regarding the viscera was obtained. Learned counsel for the applicant has lastly submitted that the applicant is facing detention since 13.4.2021 and in case he will release on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the aforesaid prayer of the applicant, but conceded on the point that PW-1 informant of the case in his cross examination has not supported the prosecution case and the aforesaid co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

¶11

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties and period of detention in jail, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant Vikas Gupta involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶14

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶15

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.6.2022 Zafar

¶19

Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI Date: 2022.06.10 10:35:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikas Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Gupta 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

Suraj Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Deepak Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rizwan Kuraishi @ Monu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ajay Pradhan Valmiki @ Ajay Vs State of U.P.

Udaiveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Gudiya Devi Vs State of U.P.