Allowed

Rupesh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Apr 2023/10533/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

applicant, Rupesh, sought bail in a case involving Sections 498-A, 504, 304-B IPC, and Dowry prohibition. The court allowed bail noting the unexplained delay in FIR, independent witness accounts suggesting accidental burning, and applicant's lack of criminal history.

What did the court decide?

applicant to be released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to non-tampering with evidence and appearing on dates.

Rupesh Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10533 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rupesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gulam Mustafa Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Gulam Mustafa, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jayant Singh Tomar, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the records.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 262 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 504, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Fatehpur Chaurasi, District Unnao.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 01.11.2019 against the applicant, his two brothers and mother alleging that the informant had got his daughter married to the applicant on 22.04.2018; that the accused persons used to harass her for demanding dowry and in the night of 21/22.03.2019 the accused persons set her ablaze. She was admitted to a Hospital at Bangarmau and thereafter she was shifted to Civil Hospital, Lucknow where she died on 10.04.2019.

¶8

The postmortem examination report of the deceased indicates that whole of the body of the deceased had received burn injuries except her head, upper part of face, perineum, front and back of it.

¶9

During investigation the Investigating Officer recorded the

¶10

statements of some independent witnesses, who were neighbors of the applicant and both of them stated that they reached the applicant's house upon hearing hue and cry raised immediately after the alleged incident and they had said that the deceased had told them that she got burnt as kerosene fell on her sari and it caught fire and both of them stated that the deceased had told that nobody was at fault for the incident.

¶11

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶12

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the incident occurred on 22.03.2019 and the informant's daughter died on 14.04.2019 yet the F.I.R. has been lodged on 01.11.2019 and there is no explanation for the delay; that the neighbors of the deceased have stated before the Investigating Officer that the deceased had told them immediately after the incident that the kerosene fell on her sari accidentally and it caught fire; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 29.02.2020 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am satisfied that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case crime.

¶14

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant-Rupesh be released on bail in Case Crime No. 262 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 504, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Fatehpur Chaurasi, District Unnao on furnishing a personal

¶16

bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶17

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 6.4.2023 Ram.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rupesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupesh 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

Chandan Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ram Murat Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Lal Ji @ Chotkau Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Mahendra Mishra and Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ajay Rawat Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.