Dismissed

Avanish Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Oct 2023BAIL/24610/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Applicant challenged his bail in a dowry death case. The High Court rejected the bail application due to the nature of the offence and the relationship with the deceased. The court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within eight months under Section 309 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial to be concluded within eight months of this order under Section 309 Cr.P.C.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:192671

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24610 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Avanish Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.278 of 2018, under Sections 498A and 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Auraiya, District Auraiya during pendency of the trial.

¶7

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and his parents and according to the FIR, marriage of the applicant was performed with the deceased in the month of May, 2015 and after marriage applicant and his family members tortured the deceased for want of dowry and on 5.2.2018 informant received an information that his sister, i.e., deceased has died.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is the husband of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation of demand of dowry and torture he has been made accused in the present matter.

¶9

He further submits that although as per post mortem deceased died due to strangulation but at the time of incident applicant was not present at his home and merely on the basis of false allegation he has been made accused in the present matter.

¶10

He further submits that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 18.2.2018, i.e., for the last more than 5-1/2 years and till date only two prosecution witnesses could be examined out of total 23 prosecution witnesses of the charge sheet and, therefore, there is no hope of early disposal of the trial and considering the long incarceration of applicant, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is the husband of the deceased and his wife died within 7 years of her marriage due to strangulation in her matrimonial home and therefore, merely on the basis of long incarceration of applicant, he should not be released on bail.

¶12

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

¶13

Although applicant is in jail in the present matter for the last more than 5-1/2 years but he is the husband of the deceased and his wife died in her matrimonial home due to strangulation and there is also allegation of demand of dowry, therefore, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.

¶15

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.

¶16

However, considering the fact that applicant is in jail since 18.2.2018, i.e., for the last about more than five years, trial court is directed to conclude the trial within eight months from the date of production of certified copy of this order in accordance with law, strictly as per provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C. on day-to-day basis without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, if there is no other legal

¶17

impediment.

¶18

Order Date :- 6.10.2023

¶19

SKM

¶20

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

Avanish Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avanish 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arvind Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dhuru Vs State of U.P.

Akshay Vs State of U.P.

Mahtab Vs State of U.P.

Firoz Vs State of U.P.

Yasir Nazeer Vs State of U.P.