Allowed

Awadhesh Kumar Rathore v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC17 May 2023BAIL/18437/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge court allowed bail application filed by husband in Sessions Trial pending under Section 304B IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. Court accepted witness statements that deceased died from accidental fall rather than suicide due to dowry harassment.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court and not tamper with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:107864

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18437 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Rathore Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Rathore,Sanjeev Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Certified copy of the F.I.R. given by applicant today in the Court is taken on record and marked as 'A'.

¶7

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Rathore, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Varun Kumar Agnihotri, learned brief holder for the State.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Sessions Trial No. 1822 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 615 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Firozabad North, District Firozabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

F.I.R. of the present case was lodged against applicant and his family members and according to the F.I.R. marriage of the daughter of the informant was performed with the applicant about three years before and after marriage she was tortured for additional demand of 'Venue' Car and on 4.8.2022 she informed some neighbour that applicant and his other family member will commit her murder and after receiving the information when informant arrived at the house of applicant then found that his daughter has been murdered.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submits applicant is husband of the deceased and he neither demanded any dowry nor he ever harassed the deceased in any manner and only being husband he has been falsely implicated by the informant in the present matter.

¶11

He further submits actually on the fateful day the deceased went on roof for the purpose of drying the clothes but suddenly some monkeys arrived and due to disbalance she fell down and sustained

¶12

head injury and thereafter immediately applicant rushed her to the hospital but doctor declared her dead and this fact has been narrated by the applicant in paragraph no. 11 and 12 of the affidavit filed support of the bail application.

¶13

He further urged, during investigation, investigating officer also recorded statements of some independent witnesses and they also confirmed the fact that deceased died due to the fall from the roof.

¶14

He next submits applicant is not having any criminal history and in jail since 8.8.2022.

¶15

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within seven years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances and there is also demand of dowry.

¶16

He further submits even if deceased committed suicide by making jump from the roof due to harassment of the applicant and his family members due to demand of dowry then also considering the provisions of Section 304B IPC and section 113B the Indian Evidence Act, applicant being husband of the deceased cannot be escaped.

¶17

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶18

Applicant is husband of the deceased and there is allegation of demand of dowry and his wife died within seven years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances but from perusal of record it reflects that deceased died due to fall from the roof and number of witnesses confirmed this fact and they also stated that after the incident applicant and his family member has taken her to hospital and her dead body was in the hospital and this fact was also admitted by the informant in the F.I.R., therefore, defence of the applicant that accidentally deceased slipped from the roof and sustained head injury cannot be fully brushed aside at this stage.

¶19

Therefore, considering the statements of the witnesses who stated that deceased died due to fall from the roof and after that applicant and his family member took her to the hospital, in my view, applicant who is although husband of the deceased is entitled to be released on bail.

¶20

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

¶21

Let the applicant-Awadhesh Kumar Rathore 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:-

¶22

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

¶23

(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.

¶24

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

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

Order Date :- 17.5.2023

¶28

Kumar Manish.

¶29

Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Awadhesh Kumar Rathore v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Awadhesh Kumar Rathore 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

Madhusudan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arjun Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Kumar Kushwaha @ Pintu Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ankit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others