Allowed

Vimal Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Jul 2023BAIL/1120/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge allowed a bail application filed by Vimal Kumar accused of dowry death. Considering Article 21, jail overcrowding, and lack of complicity evidence, the court granted bail with strict conditions regarding trial attendance and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with strict undertakings against interference and ensuring trial attendance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:135389

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1120 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vimal Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shiv Kumar Kesari

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Shiv Kumar Kesari, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vimal Kumar, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 84 of 2022 (S.T. No. 1304 of , under Sections 498A,304B IPC Police Station Sarai Mamrez, DistrictPrayagraj, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant of committing dowry death of his wife.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that deceased was suffering from number of physical aliments. The documents regarding her treatment have been brought on record.Victim was pregnant for the second time and one year ago she delivered a dead child.The C.T. Scan report of the victim shows that her left ovary had more than 12 small follicles in peripheral part.Right ovary had a cyst of 42x 32 mm size with echogenic content. She was also tested for T.B..Her treatment shows that she was treated for number of aliments. Abnormalities were also found in her blood.Deceased was under depression as there was no possibility of normal delivery.The marriage of the couple took place in the year 2020 and she committed suicide after two years of her marriage. The applicant is in jail since 29.4.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence,

¶11

evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 ; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed

¶12

Let the applicant 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶14

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶16

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 ofÏcer;

¶17

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this

¶18

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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶19

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 10.7.2023

¶22

Atul kr. sri.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vimal Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimal Kumar v. State of U.P.

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

Bhola Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Savej Vs State of U.P.

Rishu Kushwaha@ Kamal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Keshav Pd. Vs D.D.C. and Others

Mustafa Vs State of U.P.

Arun Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others