Allowed

Jishan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2023ABAIL/3046/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application allowed for the applicant accused of cruelty, dowry demand, and unnatural offense under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. Bail granted subject to specific conditions including cooperation with investigation and non-molestation of witnesses, relying on Sushila Aggarwal.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted in complaint case No.1987 of 2021 upon furnishing personal and two sureties, subject to conditions including cooperation with investigation and non-molestation of witnesses.

Jishan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:138919

¶2

Court No. - 72

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3046 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jishan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shailesh Kumar Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised. Learned counsel for the informant is not present.

¶7

Heard Sri Dhiraj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶8

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Complaint Case No.1987 of 2021, registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 377 I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, at Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District Saharanpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have married the daughter of the complainant as per Muslim rites on 2.9.2018. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry. The applicant is even stated to have sodomized her, as such, committed unnatural offence and caused injuries to her.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the injuries are simple in nature. No injury on the private part of the victim has been observed by the treating doctor. Learned counsel has stated that the present complaint case has just been filed to pressurize the applicant who is husband of the victim. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of

¶11

anticipatory bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1" . The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶14

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Jishan be released forthwith in the aforesaid complaint case (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶16

(ii). that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶17

(iii). that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶18

(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

¶19

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

(vi). that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶21

(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.

¶22

It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.

¶23

[Krishan Pahal, J.]

¶24

Order Date :- 13.7.2023 Vikas

¶25

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jishan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jishan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kailash Solanki @ Kailash Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Radha Charan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Masoom Ali @ Syed Masoom Mehdi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rinku Yadav @ Praveen Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Agnihotri Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Manish Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P.