Allowed

Dayaram Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC17 May 2023/31/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application filed by the husband of a deceased woman accused of dowry-related offences leading to suicide. The court allowed bail, noting the suicide theory supported by forensic evidence, the deceased's sister as the sole complainant, and the substantial time already served by the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:34272

¶2

Court No. - 16

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31 of 2023 Applicant :- Dayaram Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 152 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali Mankapur, District Gonda.

¶7

The Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. The relation between the applicant and the deceased was cordial. A general allegation of demand of additional dowry in the form of motorcycle, golden chain and cash has been made and committing cruelty to the deceased in lieu thereof have been attributed to all the accused persons named in the first information report. No such demand was ever made nor any complaint was ever made after the marriage or prior to the date of incident.

¶8

The Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that complainant is the sister of the deceased and she has clearly stated in the F.I.R. that on account of non fulfillment of demand of additional dowry and causing cruelty and harassment to the sister of complainant, she committed suicide. Thus, as per the

¶9

prosecution version the deceased has committed suicide, hence it is not a case of murder or strangulation.

¶10

The Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that at the time of inquest both family members of the deceased and applicant were present.

¶11

The Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the reason for committing suicide has been clearly stated in para-17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, in which it has been stated that the deceased wanted to go with her husband (the applicant) at his working place, i.e., Hubli, Karnataka, but her husband was not ready for the same as he was a low paid employee and his financial condition was not good, thus the deceased was living under mental pressure and stress and ultimately on the date of incident she committed suicide by hanging herself.

¶12

The Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that as per the postmortem report of the deceased cause of death is asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging and there is only one ligature mark found all around the neck of the deceased. In support of his argument that deceased committed suicide by hanging herself, the learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance upon the extract of Modi's Medical Jurisprudence, wherein definition of hanging has been described. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the definition of hanging given in Modi's Jurisprudence and the postmortem report of the deceased are almost identical, it appears a case of committing suicide by hanging and not the murder or strangulation, therefore, applicant may be enlarged on bail by this Court sympathetically.

¶13

Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been

¶14

placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out the applicant is in jail since 21.05.2022 and has by now done a substantial period of incarceration, therefore, the bail application of the applicant may also be considered by this Court sympathetically and he should also be released on bail.

¶15

The learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the co-accused Amravati (the applicant's mother) has already been granted bail by means of order dated 27.09.2022 passed by a coordinate bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11071of 2022.

¶16

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

¶17

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also in the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the fact that general allegations with regard to demand of dowry and committing cruelty in lieu thereof have been attributed to all the accused persons named in the first information report; as per the postmortem report of the deceased cause of death is asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging and there is only one ligature mark found all around

¶18

the neck of the deceased; as per Modi's Medical Jurisprudence, wherein definition of hanging has been described the postmortem report of the deceased is almost identical, it appears a case of committing suicide by hanging and not the murder or strangulation; the reasons for committing suicide by the deceased have clearly been stated in para-17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, which appear to be justified and that the co-accused Amravati, has already been granted bail and further considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶20

Let the applicant- Dayaram Verma be released on bail in Case Crime No. 152 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali Mankapur, District Gonda. i, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: -

¶21

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶26

Order Date :- 17.5.2023 Preeti.

¶27

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dayaram Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dayaram Verma 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Pal @ Ajay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Lko.

Saurabh Singh @ Monu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Mannu @ Ayan Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Mustaq Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Kashish Malhotra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko.