Allowed

Bhusaili v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Allahabad HC10 Apr 2023/1876/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a bail application filed by Bhusaili, who was accused of his step-daughter's death linked to dowry harassment and electrocution/strangulation charges. The applicant, a 60-year-old with no criminal record living separately from the co-accused, was granted bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Bhusaili be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned.

Bhusaili Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1876 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Bhusaili Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajendra Prasad Lodhi

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar Sahu, learned Addl. Government Advocate, Sri Rajendra Prasad Lodhi, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶6

By means of the instant application the applicant Bhusaili S/o Bhikhu seeks bail in Case Crime No. 420 of 2022, under sections 498A, 304B, 302, I.P.C. and section 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Fakharpur, District Bahraich.

¶7

This case has been registered on the basis of a first information report (F.I.R.) lodged on 02.11.2022 against the applicant, his wife and two sons alleging that the informant had got her daughter, aged about 25 years, married to the applicant's son co-accused Niranjan about 4 years ago; that his daughter had given birth to two sons, who are aged about 2 years and 1 year respectively; and on Ist of November 2022 at about 6 p.m. the applicant told him through phone that his daughter had died due to electrocution.

¶8

The informant was also a witness to the inquest proceedings and the inquest-report mentions opinion of the witnesses present that the deceased had died due to electrocution, however, in the postmortem examination report of the dead body of the informant's daughter several injuries 'abrasion and contusion' have been reported on her body, besides a ligature

¶9

mark present around her neck, and the cause of death has been opined to be 'Asphyxia due to Antimortem strangulation'.

¶10

A certificate issued by the Gram Pradhan has been annexed with the affidavit, certifying that the applicant is residing separate from his son Niranjan for the past 3 years.

¶11

During statement of the informant recorded under section 161 CrPC although general allegations were leveled against the applicant, his wife and son Niranjan, no allegation was leveled against the other named accused Suraj.

¶12

The co-accused Shanti Devi has already been granted bail by means of an order dated 1st of March 2023 passed by this Court in Bail Application No. 1689 of 2023.

¶13

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application it has been stated that the applicant is 60 years old innocent person, having no criminal history and he is in jail since 06th of November 2022.

¶14

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the F.I.R. contains general allegations against all the accused persons; that the applicant claims to be residing separate from his son for the first three years which claim is supported by a certificate issued by the village Pradhan; and the applicant's wife co-ccused Shanti Devi has already been granted bail, coupled with the fact that the applicant is 60 years old person, having no criminal history and languishing in jail since 6th of November 2022, without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant Bhusaili S/o Bhikhu be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime No. 420 of 2022, under sections 498A, 304B, 302, I.P.C. and section 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Fakharpur, District Bahraich, on his furnishing a personal 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;

¶18

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶19

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶20

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

¶21

( Subhash Vidyarthi, J. )

¶22

Order Date :- 10.4.2023 A.Nigam

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Bhusaili v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhusaili v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

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

Jane Alam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Ram Mohan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko.

Navjot Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Narendra Kumar Verma Alias Raj Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Golu Alias Raunak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Shivam Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others