Allowed

Dalchandra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2023BAIL/38998/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application regarding allegations of dowry harassment and suicide death, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the husband applicant. Although the applicant did not appear, the Court appointed an amicus curiae and allowed bail based on his lack of criminal history and the nature of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions including not tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.

Dalchandra Vs State of U.P. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177557

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38998 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Dalchandra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Lal,Abhilasha Singh,Ashutosh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

Matter is called out. None appears for the applicant to press the bail application. The names of the learned counsel for the applicant are shown in the cause list.

¶7

Learned counsel at the Bar has been requested to assist the Court in the matter. This Court in the light of the holding in Maneesh Pathak vs. State of U.P. passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18536 of 2020 is not dismissing the case for non prosecution. Learned members at the Bar have volunteered to assist the Court pro bono in the highest tradition of the profession. The Court has appointed learned counsel as amicus curiae.

¶8

By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 43 of 2023 at Police Station-Bahjoi, District-Sambhal under Sections 304B, 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of

¶9

Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant is in jail since 15.02.2023.

¶10

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by the this Court on 24.08.2023.

¶11

The following arguments made by learned amicus curiae on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶12

The applicant is the husband of the deceased.

¶13

The applicant never harassed the deceased nor did he demand dowry.

¶14

The applicant is bereaved by the death of his wife.

¶15

The deceased was a temperamental lady who was prone to extreme reactions over trivial issues.

¶16

On the fateful day, after a minor disagreement with the members of the households, she flew into a fit of rage and took the extreme step of ending her life. She committed suicide by hanging.

¶17

The post mortem report opines that the cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging.

¶18

Injuries depicted in the post mortem report consistent with hanging are:

¶19

(i). Ligature mark present on whole circumference of neck and front of neck above thyroid at the level of hyoid bone. On dissection subcutaneous tissue

¶20

underneath of ligature mark is white and glistening.

¶21

The applicant did not abet or instigate the deceased to commit suicide.

¶22

Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the offence.

¶23

The records available with the learned A.G.A. disclose that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶24

The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to join the trial proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.

¶25

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶26

Let the applicant- Dalchandra be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶27

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.

¶28

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶29

The Court has been informed that the lawyers in district- Sambhal are striking work. Liberty of citizens is too sacrosanct and cannot be held to ransom by striking lawyers.

¶30

The District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Sambhal shall ensure that appropriate legal aid is made available to the applicant for purposes of submitting sureties and completion of other formalities for being set forth at liberty.

¶31

Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Sambhal for onward communication to the applicant who is in jail, and for assisting the applicant in all legal formalities for being set forth at liberty as stated above.

¶32

Order Date :- 13.9.2023 Vandit

¶33

Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dalchandra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dalchandra 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pintu Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rajinder Saini Vs State of U.P.

Nanhey @ Amit Vs State of U.P.

Varasat Ali Vs State of U.P.

Sachin @ Surendra Vs State of U.P.

Vijaymal Vs State of U.P.