Allowed

Amit Kumar Goyal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 May 2023ABAIL/4783/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed in a dowry death prosecution. The applicant was enlarged on bail subject to standard conditions including appearance, non-interference with witnesses, and restrictions on traveling abroad.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted along with personal and two sureties. Accusant must appear in court, not tamper with evidence or witnesses, and not leave India without permission.

Amit Kumar Goyal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:112750

¶2

Court No. - 83

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4783 of 2023 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Goyal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Awadhesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.197 of 2017, registered under Sections 498A, 304B, 323, 328, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act at Police Station- Prem Nagar, District Bareilly with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the marriage of the brother-in-law of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 25.01.2014. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry of Rs.5 lakhs and a Scorpio car, thereby put her to death on 16.05.2017.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is the brother-in-law of the deceased person as he is the husband of sister-in-law (Nandoi) of the deceased. The applicant lives separately to the family and has nothing to do with the said offence and even the name of the applicant has been wrongly transcribed in the FIR. It has been mentioned as Amit Gupta rather his name is Amit Kumar Goyal. The applicant had no knowledge of any coercive measures has been taken against him. A perusal of the order-sheet indicates that NBW has been issued against him. 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. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has cooperated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also

¶10

failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.

¶11

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.

¶12

On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is the brother-in-law (Nandoi) of the deceased person, 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.

¶13

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the accused-applicant- Amit Kumar Goyal be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (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:-

¶14

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

¶15

(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;

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(Krishan Pahal, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 23.5.2023/Ravi Kant

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amit Kumar Goyal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar Goyal 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

Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Muinuddin Vs State of U.P.

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Ahmad Khan Vs State of U.P.

Nazar Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Siya Ram Vs State of U.P.