Dismissed

Sonu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2023ABAIL/10421/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicants, relatives of the deceased in a mid-grade dispute involving alleged suicide by poisoning, faced prima facie charges. The court found no sufficient cause to exercise discretion in their favor despite their denial of the allegations.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. dismissed; applicant no.3 directed to surrender and seek bail separately.

Sonu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:178609

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10421 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sonu And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Mohan Pandey,Krishan Mohan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Anand Mohan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.99 of 2022, under Sections 147, 306, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Ayana, District Auraiya.

¶8

In short, the prosecution story is that the opposite party no.2 has lodged the impugned FIR against 9 persons including the applicants alleging therein that his brother Dharmendra Singh has sold out his land and consideration amount allegedly was kept with his wife Soni. On 10.08.2022, at around 10 am, when the applicant's deceased brother asked for the money kept from his wife, she denied and called her maternal house and called Radheshyam, Sonu, Kitab, Bunty, Gudiya, Bablu, Kallan Singh, Aman, who came in Eco Car and have started abusing and while taking the money, they have stated that you can do whatever you want. It is further alleged that all the above persons have badly beaten the brother of the informant with kicks and punches and after humiliating him in front of everyone in the society, due to which, he consumed poisonous substance and all the above mentioned persons ran away from the place of incident. It is further alleged that the wife of deceased Dharmendra took him to Sefai Hospital, where Dharmendra was declared dead by the doctor. It is further alleged that Panchnama and the Postmortem of the deceased Dharmendra was done in the post-mortem house, Etawah. It is further alleged that a suicide note was found in the pocket of the deceased.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case, in fact, no such incident has taken place. The applicants have never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The marriage of

¶10

applicants' sister, namely, Soni was solemnized with the younger brother of informant/opposite party no.2, namely, Dharmendra Singh in the year 2010 and from their wedlock, 2 male child were born, who are now 12 years and 7 years respectively. He further submits that applicant nos.1 and 2 are brother-in-law whereas the applicant no.3 is sister-in-law of the deceased. The FIR has been lodged after two months of the alleged incident for which no plausible explanation has been mentioned. He further submits that the deceased himself has committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance. He further submits that just to harass and grab the landed property of the deceased and to throw out wife of deceased Soni and his children, a false and fabricated FIR has been lodged against the applicants. He further submits that the investigation is going on and till date no charge sheet has been filed. The applicants have apprehension of imminent arrest and in case, applicants are released on anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty and would co-operate with the trial.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants and has prayed for rejection by submitting that as per suicide notes, prima facie offence is made out against the applicants. The allegations are very serious and keeping in view the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicants, applicants are not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicants is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶12

In the light of above, looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties as mentioned above, taking into consideration the role assigned to the applicants as per prosecution case, gravity and nature of accusation, this Court is of the view that no case for exercising its discretionary power under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is made out in favour of applicant.

¶13

Accordingly, this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

¶14

However considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant no.3-Kitabshree @ Ranjana Devi, who is sister of applicant nos.1 and 2, appears and surrender before the court below and seeks grant of bail, her application shall be heard and decided, expeditiously, in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 15.9.2023/Ajeet

¶16

Digitally signed by :- AJEET KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sonu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Virendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arnav Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shivam Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Pushpa Devi Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sagar Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P.