Allowed

Lakhan Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Lko.

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2023/51/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed. The court held that considering the hanging as cause of death, no external injuries, and the applicant's undertaking, he is entitled to bail, subject to specific conditions including attendance and cooperation in trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to cooperate in trial and appear on dates.

Lakhan Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Lakhan Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 24.9.2022 in Case Crime No. 575 of 2022 u/s 498A, 304B IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Pihani, District Hardoi.

¶7

It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. As per the prosecution story narrated in the F.I.R. the entire family including the present applicant is responsible for torturing and demanding dowry from the victim (since deceased). The present applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. He was having cordial relation with his daughter-in-law as he has not demanded any dowry from her or her family members. As a matter of fact, the present applicant is a well-of person and is a retired army personnel, presently working as Security Officer, Punjab National Bank, Hardoi. He remained on duty from 9.30 A.M. to 6.00 P.M. No specific role has been levelled against the present applicant. The cause of death of victim is hanging and there is no external injury on her body as per the postmortem report except one ligature mark which might have caused due to hanging. Annexure no. 2 is the inquest report which shows that the information of the incident was given by the son of the present applicant. At the time of inquest the present applicant was present at the place of inquest. The time of suicide as indicated in the F.I.R. was about 3.00 P.M. when the present applicant was not present in the house. He has further submitted that his son Darshan Singh Yadav is in jail. Charge-sheet has been filed in this

¶8

case.

¶9

The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the cause of death is hanging, no external injury has been caused to the victim (since deceased) except the ligature mark which might have caused due to hanging, charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

¶12

Let the applicant Lakhan Singh , involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) 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.

¶14

(ii) 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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation

¶16

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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iv) 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 sufficient 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.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned.

¶19

Before parting with it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures as per law if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial properly. The learned trial court shall fix short dates to ensure that trial is concluded at the earliest.

¶20

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 11.1.2023 Om

¶22

Digitally signed by :- OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Lakhan Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhan Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. 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

Suraj Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Vinod Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Pramod Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Ravindra Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Lko.

Surendra Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. S.P. C.B.I/a.C.B. Lko.

Mayank Bajpai Vs State of U.P. Thru. S.P. C.B.I/a.C.B. Lko.