Allowed

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 May 2023BAIL/17765/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC. The High Court granted bail, noting the victim died in her paternal home with an intact hyoid bone indicating suicide, rather than in the matrimonial home as alleged by the prosecution. The court emphasized that observations were limited to bail disposal.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with standard conditions regarding appearance and no tampering with evidence.

Jitendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:110414

¶2

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17765 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Kumar Ojha,D.K.Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri D.K.Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ghanshyam Mishra, learned brief holder for the State-respondent.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 745 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC & 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Uttar, DistrictFirozabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶7

FIR of the present case was lodged on 4.9.2022 against the applicant and his other family members and according to the FIR, marriage of the applicant was performed with the daughter of the informant on 8.7.2022 and since marriage, his daughter was being continuously harassed by the applicant and his family members for a Wagno-R and Rs. 2 lacs and on the festival of Rakshabandhan, his daughter came at her house but even at the house of the informant, applicant and his family members tortured her as they resided nearby. It is further mentioned in the FIR that informant and his wife about eight days before had gone to Faridabad and his daughter was alone in the house and on 3.9.2022, applicant committed her murder and this information was received by the informant through his brother Rajveer Singh.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegations made against the applicant are totally false and baseless and applicant is the husband of the deceased and he neither tortured the deceased nor demanded any dowry. He further submitted that deceased died within two months of her marriage in her paternal home and in the two months, applicant could not even properly understand his wife and it is hard to believe that within two months of marriage a husband could commit murder of his wife in his in-laws house.

¶9

He further submitted that from the perusal of the post-mortem report, it appears that deceased committed suicide as cause of

¶10

death is hanging and her hyoid bone was found intact. He further submitted that actually deceased was not happy with her marriage with the applicant and she wanted to marry with some other person and only due to this reason, she committed suicide in her paternal home.

¶11

He further submitted that during investigation, investigating officer recorded the statement of the younger sister of the deceased and she stated that on 3.9.2022, when she was going to her coaching then at that time, applicant and some other persons were in her home along with the deceased and when she returned back from the coaching then she found that her sister was hanging but on the basis of statement of the sister of the deceased, it cannot be said that applicant either committed the murder of the deceased or due to his torture she committed suicide.

¶12

He further submitted that when the statement of the father of the victim was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. then he although, stated that when his younger daughter returned from the coaching then she found that her elder sister i.e. deceased has died but he did not state in his statement that earlier at the time of departure from her house for coaching, his younger daughter witnessed that applicant and other accused persons were in his house, therefore, this fact shows that during investigation, only to procure evidence, the younger sister of the deceased started giving statements that on the date of incident, applicant and some other persons were at the home of the deceased. He further submitted that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and he is in jail since 8.11.2022.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is the husband of the deceased and his wife died under abnormal circumstances within two months of her marriage and there is specific allegation of demand of dowry but could not dispute the fact that the wife of the applicant was died in her paternal home and autopsy report shows that she might have committed suicide.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶15

Although, applicant is the husband and his wife died within two months of her marriage under abnormal circumstances and there is also allegation of demand of dowry and younger sister of the deceased also in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that on 3.9.2022, when she was going to her

¶16

coaching then at that time, applicant and some other persons were at her home along with the deceased and when she returned back from her coaching then she found that her elder sister has died but admittedly deceased died in her paternal home and not in her matrimonial home. Further, merely on the basis of statement of the younger sister of the deceased, it cannot be inferred at this stage that due to torture of the applicant, she subsequently after his departure committed suicide.

¶17

Therefore, as deceased died in her paternal home and not in her matrimonial home and according to the post-mortem report, her hyoid bone was found intact and cause of death was ante-mortem hanging, in my view applicant, who is although husband of the deceased is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Jitendra Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶25

Order Date :- 19.5.2023 KK Patel

¶26

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

Jitendra Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopal Singh Chauhan @ Gopi Vs State of U.P.

Prashant Paurush Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Jitendra Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.

Saif Ali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Himanshu Gupta Vs State of U.P.