Allowed

Bhurey Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2023BAIL/27587/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Bhurey Singh, the father-in-law of a deceased woman who committed suicide. The court held that while the applicant bore a burden of proof due to suicide occurring in his house, he had not established incriminating circumstances requiring custodial arrest.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in terms of conditions including personal attendance and undertakings against adjournments.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:144780

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27587 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Bhurey Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pashali Slolanki,A.K. Singh Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh Solanki, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A for State.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Bhurey Singh seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 0183 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Sidhpura, District-Kasganj duirng the pendency of trial.

¶9

It transpires from the record that marriage of Deepak (son of applicant) was solemnized with Kajal (daughter of first informant)-Shiv Dayal on 26.03.2020 in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. From the aforesaid wedlock, a male child was born. However just after expiry of a period of a period of 2 years and approximately 7 months from the date of marriage of the son of applicant, an unfortunate incident occurred on 31.10.2022 in which, the daughter-in-law of applicant died as she committed suicide by consuming some poisonous substance.

¶10

The information regarding aforesaid incident at the concerned police station was not given by applicant or any of his family members but by one Santosh Kumar on telephone, who is reported to be a resident of the same village. On the above information, the police arrived on the spot and took possession of the dead body of the deceased.

¶11

Consequently, the proceedings of inquest (Panchayatnama) commenced. While the inquest (Panchayatnama) was being conducted, the first informant-Shiv Dayal (father of the deceased) appeared at concerned Police Station and submitted a written

¶12

report for lodging the FIR. Subsequently, an FIR dated 31.10.2022 came to be lodged by first informant Shiv Dayal (father of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No. 0183 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Sidhpura, District-Kasganj. In the aforesaid F.I.R., 2 persons namely (i) Deepak (Husband) and (ii) Bhurey Singh (Father-in-law) have been nominated as named accused.

¶13

The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that marriage of the daughter of the first informant (Kajal aged about 22 years) was solemnized with Deepak Kashyap about 2 years prior to the date of the FIR. At the time of marriage sufficient amount of goods and dowry were given. However, the Son-in-law of first informant and his other family members were dissatisfied with the same. Subsequently, additional demand of dowry was made. However, as demand of additional dowry was not satisfied, physical and mental cruelty is alleged to have been committed upon the daughter of the first informant. Ultimately, the daughter of the first informant died on 31.10.2022.

¶14

After aforementioned FIR was lodged, the Investigating Officer proceeded with statutory investigation of concerned case crime number in terms of Chapter-XII Cr.P.C. He examined the first informant and other witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. who have supported the FIR. On the basis of above and other material collected by the Investigating Officer during course of investigation he came to the conclusion that offence complained of is fully established against named accused. He, accordingly, submitted the charge sheet dated 21.03.2023.

¶15

Learned counsel for applicant contends that though applicant is a named as well as charged sheeted accused but he is innocent. Deepak, son of applicant/husband of the deceased, is already in jail. Applicant cannot be said to be the beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry.

¶16

It is next contended that the deceased was a short tempered lady and she has taken the extreme step of committing suicide by consuming some poisonous substance. As per the viscera report of the deceased dated 17.02.2023, Aluminum Phosphide was found in the samples taken from the body of the deceased. He further submits that the bona-fide of the applicant is further explicit from the fact that no external or internal anti-mortem injury was found on the body of the deceased. Applicant is in jail since 17.03.2023. As such, he has undergone more than 3 and 1/2 month of

¶17

incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. As such, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant stands crystallized. Up to this stage, no such material has been gathered by the Investigating Officer on the basis of which, it can be definitely concluded that the deceased committed suicide on account of an immediate act of applicant nor abetment, instigation or coercion is established against applicant either. Moreover, no such incriminating circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial. He, therefore, submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.

¶18

Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that the deceased was a young girl aged about 22 years who has died before expiry of even 3 years from the date of her marriage at her marital home. The occurrence took place in the house of the applicant. Since the death of the deceased has occurred within 7 years of marriage at her marital home, therefore, applicant is under burden not only to explain the manner of occurrence by virtue of Section 106 of the Evidence Act but also his innocence in terms of Section 113B IPC of the Evidence Act. However, the applicant miserably failed to discharge the aforesaid burden. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. contends that no indulgence be granted by this Court in favour of applicant.

¶19

Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of record, evidence, nature and gravity of offence, complicity of accused and accusations made coupled with the fact that prima facie the death of the deceased is a suicidal death and not homicidal, bona fide of the applicant is apparent from the fact that no internal or external ante-mortem injury were found on the body of the deceased, the police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, therefore, the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against applicant now stands crystallized,the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during the pendency of trial, the clean antecedents of applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, applicant is the father-in-law of deceased and primafacie he cannot be said to be the beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry, but without making any comment on the merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶20

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶21

Let the applicant-Bhurey Singh, be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶22

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES ARE PRESENT IN COURT. IN CASE OF DEFAULT OF THIS CONDITION, IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT IT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PASS ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶23

(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶24

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM/HER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶25

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶26

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶27

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.

¶28

Order Date :- 7.7.2023 Vinay

¶29

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

Bhurey Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhurey Singh 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

Mohit Bhati Vs State of U.P.

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

Akash Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Arjun and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Bal Mukund Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Avdhesh Kumar Tomar Vs State of U.P.