Dismissed

Meghnath v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jun 2023BAIL/19479/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava, J. rejected bail application of Meghnath accused under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC for dowry death, ruling he cannot be released considering gravity of offence and reliance on Sudha Singh.

What did the court decide?

Bail application of accused Meghnath rejected; he remains in custody.

What the court decided

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:125331

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19479 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Meghnath Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Usha Srivastava,Arjit Srivastava,Vinod Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

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

¶7

This bail application has been filed by the applicant - Meghnath involved in case crime no.277 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri.

¶8

An F.I.R. against the present accused applicant - the husband of the deceased and his brother Harinath was lodged by the informant on 21.4.2020 alleging therein that after the marriage of the accused applicant with the deceased in 2015, she was subjected to cruelty and harassment on account of demand of additional dowry by the accused persons, who also administered some insecticide to her and subsequently they committed her murder and then hanged her on a ceiling fan. Investigation started and now charge-sheet has been submitted in the matter.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed any offence. Alleged offences are not made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that the marriage of the applicant was solemnized without any dowry. The applicant never raised any demand for motorcycle or ring as additional dowry from the deceased or her family members and she was never subjected to cruelty or harassment by him particularly, in view of the fact that five years were elapsed after her marriage. It is further submitted that the deceased herself administered some insecticide for committing suicide and resultantly she died. It is further submitted that the applicant himself informed the family members of the deceased about her death. As a matter of fact, the informant was demanding for Rs.2 lakh from the applicant and when he refused, he has been falsely roped in this case. It is further submitted that that the deceased herself committed suicide. It is further submitted that the co-accused Harinath, the brother-in-law (jeth) of the deceased has been granted bail in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.-31582 of 2020 by this Court vide order dated 13.1.2023. It is further submitted that in the F.I.R., it is alleged that the applicant had some illicit relations with his sister-in-law (bhabhi), which was

¶10

totally a false and concocted story of the prosecution. It is further submitted that except ligature mark, no other external injury has been found on the body of the deceased. It is further submitted that at the time of the incident, the applicant was not present at home and when he came back, he was informed by his son that the deceased was hanged with a fan and he anyhow made a way to his house. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 21.4.2020. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate in the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted that according to the evidence collected by the I.O., it is found that on account of demand of motorcycle and golden ring as additional dowry, the applicant tortured and harassed the deceased and in the adverse circumstances, she was compelled to come back to her parental house, but however subsequently on the assurance of the applicant, she was again sent to her in-laws' house, but this time also she was assaulted and was administered some insecticide and subsequently she died. It is further submitted that the deceased had a small child and she had no reason to commit suicide. It is further submitted that case of the present accused applicant is distinguishable from the co-accused Harinath, who is the brother-in-law (jeth) of the deceased whereas the present accused applicant is the husband of the deceased and as such, a prayer for rejection of bail has been made.

¶12

The cause of death of the deceased has been shown as Asphyxia due to Antemortem hanging in the Autopsy report. The accused is the husband of the deceased and he had full responsibility to keep her wife safe and secure.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also keeping in view the eyewitness account and medical report of the deceased as well as nature and gravity of the offence, evidence, complicity of accused and relying upon the principles enumerated in Sudha Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Another (2021) 4 Supreme Court Cases 781 , and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not find it fit to release the applicant on bail.

¶14

The bail application of the accused-applicant is rejected.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.6.2023 ss

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Meghnath v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Meghnath 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

Ram Pratap Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravindra Kumar @ Ravi Sagar Vs State of U.P.

Arun Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Virendra @ Veeru Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Paurush Kumar Samadhiya Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Datt @ Arjun Vs State of U.P.