Allowed

Lokesh @ Lokendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 May 2023BAIL/19378/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Allahabad, allowed the bail application filed by the applicant-accused in a case involving sections 498A, 304B, and 376 IPC. The court held that the allegations were false and baseless, noting witness hostility, and observed that the case for bail was made out without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount subject to standard bail conditions.

Lokesh @ Lokendra Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:120391

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19378 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Lokesh @ Lokendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vandana Gupta,Ashutosh Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicantaccused in case crime No.139 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B, 376, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and section 3/4 D.P. Act, police station Magorra, District Mathura with the prayer to enlarge the applicant-accused on bail.

¶9

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant-accused that the applicant-accused is brother-in-law of deceased and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The marriage of deceased with brother of applicant-accused has taken place in the year 2015. The allegations of dowry demand and harassment of deceased, levelled against applicant-accused, are thoroughly false and baseless. Referring to the FIR and statement of informant, it was submitted that the allegation that one day before the incident, the applicant has committed rape upon victim, is wholly improbable. In her life time, the deceased has never made such complaint. It was pointed out that informant (mother of deceased) and uncle of deceased

¶10

have already been examined before the trial court as P.W.1 and P.W.2 and they did not support the prosecution version and turned hostile. In postmortem report, except ligature mark, no other injury has been shown on the body of deceased and cause of death has been shown asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that there is no credible evidence against applicant-accused. Lastly, it has been submitted that applicant-accused is languishing in jail since 19.07.2022, having no criminal history, and that in case the applicant-accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, period of custody and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant-accused Lokesh @ Lokendra involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶14

(i) The applicant-accused shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

(ii) The applicant-accused shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant-accused shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant-accused shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶18

(v) The applicant-accused 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant-accused in accordance with law.

¶20

Order Date :- 30.5.2023 Neeraj

¶21

Digitally signed by :- NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lokesh @ Lokendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lokesh @ Lokendra 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

Angad Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Govind Kumar Gautam @ Govinda Vs State of U.P.

Saed Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P.

Anshuman Chandra Alias Prince Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Ashfaq Vs State of U.P. and Another