Allowed

Kiran Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Oct 2023BAIL/31852/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted bail to an applicant charged with dowry death and related offences. The court emphasized the delay in trial, lack of criminal history for the applicant, and overcrowding in jails. Several conditions regarding appearance and conduct were imposed.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, ensuring court presence for key stages, and

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:195352

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31852 of 2020

¶4

Applicant :- Kiran Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Srivastava,Alka Srivastava

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Umesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant in the FIR and other co-accused of causing dowry death of the deceased after putting her on fire.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the role of putting the deceased on fire has not been assigned to the applicant in the FIR. It is stated that however in the dying declaration allegation has been made by the deceased against the applicant and his wife.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant stated that the applicant is in jail since 10.08.2020 and has no criminal history to his credit. Before the trial court, seven prosecution witnesses have been examined as per status report sent by the trial court. There are 10 prosecution witnesses in all the case. This is the first implication of the applicant. Trial will take further time to conclude.

¶11

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No.

¶13

5191 of 2021 ; considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Kiran Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 20 of 2018, under Sections- 498-A, 304-B, 120-B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police StationPallavpuram, District- Meerut, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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 him in accordance with law.

¶20

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be

¶22

verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶23

Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months.

¶24

Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days.

¶25

Order Date :- 10.10.2023 Rohit

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kiran Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akeel Ahmad @ Rehan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dhananjay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Shoib Vs State of U.P.

Awanish Balmiki Vs State of U.P.

Pravesh Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Kumar Kharwar Vs State of U.P. and Another