Allowed

Gaurav Tyagi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC30 May 2023BAIL/20013/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed in a case involving charges of cruelty and dowry harassment resulting in the death of the applicant's wife, the court observed an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR and accidental death circumstances. The applicant was subsequently granted bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Gaurav Tyagi Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:120303

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20013 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Gaurav Tyagi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Lochan Shukla,Arya Suman Pandey,Yogesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sushil Kumar Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today on behalf of the informant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Dr.S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.115 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 304B and 201 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Ratanpuri, District Mzaffarnagar during pendency of the trial.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged on 11.8.2021 against the applicant and his mother and according to the FIR, the marriage of applicant was performed with the sister of informant on 2.12.2014 and after marriage his sister was tortured for want of Rs. 10,00,000/- by applicant and his mother and on 24.6.2021 at about 11.00 PM in the night informant received a call from the 'mausi' of applicant that accidentally applicant and his sister fell in Khatauli canal while they were coming from Haridwar on motorcycle and when informant arrived at Khatauli canal then found that applicant was standing outside the canal and his sister was missing.

¶10

It is further mentioned in the FIR that in spite of extensive search for 10 days by Police and PAC his sister could not be found and thereafter due to paralysis of his father he could not earlier lodge FIR of the present case and applicant and his mother for want of dowry after committing the murder of his sister vanished her dead body.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegation against the applicant is totally false and baseless and only being husband of the deceased, applicant after about more than one and half months made accused in the present matter. He further submits that applicant neither ever demanded any dowry nor he ever tortured the deceased.

¶12

He next urged that admittedly the marriage of applicant was performed with the deceased about more than six and half years before and with the wedlock of applicant and deceased two children were born and there was absolutely no occasion for applicant to torture the deceased for want of dowry.

¶13

He next submits that even as per FIR, informant received information of the incident on 24.6.2021 but he moved an application for lodgement of the FIR on 5.8.2021, i..e, almost after about more than one and half months and although in the FIR he stated that after the incident due to paralysis of his father, he earlier could not lodge FIR of the present matter but informant very casually tried to explain the inordinate delay in lodging the FIR and merely by making such a vague averment it cannot be said that informant has explained the inordinate delay of about one and half months in lodging the FIR of the present case and delay in lodging the FIR itself shows that FIR is based on totally false and frivolous facts and it has been lodged after due consultation.

¶14

He further submits that actually while applicant was returning from Haridwar along with his wife on motorcycle they accidentally fell in Khatauli canal and luckily applicant survived but his wife could not be found in spite of extensive search made by Police and 'Mausi' of applicant informed this fact to informant and informant admitted this fact in the FIR itself. He further submits, this fact is even evident from the statement of Sub Inspector Lalit Kumar recorded during investigation which has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application.

¶15

He further submits, the above fact that on the date of incident applicant was returning from Haridwar along with his wife on motorcycle, is also evident from the statement of Naushad alias Kale, Proprietor of Hotel and from his statement it is evident that applicant and his wife stayed in his hotel for a short period and thereafter they proceeded further.

¶16

He further submits that Investigating Officer during investigation also recorded the statement of one Sadat, who stated that on 24.6.021 at about 10.30 PM when he was going from his Car then under the canal highway bridge a person was trying to stop him but due to suspicion he did not stop and he informed this fact to the proprietor of the hotel, namely, Naushad alias Kale and on the informant of Naushad alias Kale, Police arrived at spot and tried to search the wife of applicant.

¶17

He further argued, all above noted facts clearly suggests that it is a case of accidental death and after about one and half months informant after cooking up false story implicated the applicant and his mother in the present matter.

¶18

He further submits that applicant in the present matter is

¶19

in jail since 10.11.2021, i.e., for the last more than one and half years.

¶20

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is the husband of the deceased and his wife died under abnormal circumstances within 7 years of her marriage and there is also allegation of demand of Rs.10,00,000/- and applicant committed murder of his wife in a very planned manner and thereafter with his connivance his 'mausi' informed the informant that due to accident applicant and his wife along with motorcycle fell in the canal.

¶21

Learned counsel for the informant further submitted that there is no medical report of applicant on record which can show that applicant also fell in the canal and this fact clearly suggests that he in a planned manner after committing the murder of his wife either threw her dead body in the canal or disposed it off in some other manner at some other place and being husband applicant cannot be escaped from the clutches of Sections 304B IPC and 113B Indian Evidence Act.

¶22

He further submits that delay in lodging the FIR has been duly explained by the informant even in the FIR and, therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, applicant should not be released on bail.

¶23

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

¶24

Although applicant is the husband of the deceased and his wife died under abnormal circumstances within 7 years of marriage and there is also allegation of demand of Rs. 10,00,000/- but FIR of the present case was lodged after about

¶25

one and half months on the application dated 5.8.2021 and even application dated 5.8.2021 was moved after more than one month. Although, informant tried to explain the delay in lodging the FIR by mentioning that after the incident due to paralysis of his father he could not lodge FIR earlier but except bald avernment made in the FIR, there is no other evidence on record in this regard and even learned counsel for the informant in his counter affidavit did not append any medical prescription of the father of informant. Therefore, it appears that there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR of the present case of about one and half months.

¶26

Further, from the record it reflects that accidentally applicant and his wife fell in the canal on 24.6.2021 while they were returning from Haridwar on motorcycle and on the information of proprietor of the Hotel, police arrived at spot and extensive search was made to search the body of the deceased but unfortunately the dead of the deceased could not be found and this fact is evident from the statement of Senior Sub Inspector Lalit Kumar which was recorded by Investigating Officer during investigation and in this regard GD entry was also made on 24.6.2021 and this fact is also evident from GD entry dated 11.8.2021 at 22.49 hours, which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application.

¶27

Further, there is also statement of Naushad alias Kale, Proprietor of the Hotel that before proceedings towards canal applicant and his wife stayed in his Hotel for a short period and during investigation Investigating Officer also recorded statement of Sadab, who stated that on 24.6.2021 at about 10.38 PM in the night one person was trying to stop him but due to suspicion he did not stop but he informed this fact to the

¶28

proprietor of the Hotel Naushad alias Kale and thereafter Naushad alias Kale informed the Police and on his information Police arrived and made the search of the wife of applicant in canal.

¶29

Therefore, at this stage, prima facie it reflects that due to accident applicant and his wife fell in canal along with the motorcycle and anyhow applicant could survive but his wife could not survive and even her dead body could not be found. It also reflects from the record that during search motorcycle of applicant was found from the canal.

¶30

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant, who is although husband of the deceased, is entitled to be released on bail.

¶31

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

¶32

Let the applicant- Gaurav Tyagi 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:-

¶33

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

¶34

(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.

¶35

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶36

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.

¶37

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.

¶38

Order Date :- 30.5.2023

¶39

SKM

¶40

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gaurav Tyagi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav Tyagi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Waseem Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Nafees Vs State of U.P.

Anadil Vs State of U.P.

Azam Hussain Vs State of U.P.

Brajesh Sachan @ Kukku Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikas Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others