Allowed

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Oct 2023BAIL/43250/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 43250 of 2023. The Allahabad High Court, while dismissing the objection that no factual finding on bail can be made regarding the merits of a criminal case involving death, allowed the bail application. The court ruled that the applicant admitted his wife and deceased daughter to the hospital, and there was no evidence on record that he administered poison to th

What did the court decide?

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

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:196272

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43250 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Sri Sundeep Shukla, Advocate filed his power on behalf of the informant, today in the Court, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sundeep Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Ravi Kant Kushwaha, learned AGA for the State.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 402 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 328, 307, 302, 506 IPC and Section 3, 4 D.P. Act, Police Station Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahar during pendency of the trial.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and his family members and according to the FIR marriage of the applicant was performed with the sister of the informant about five years before and after marriage applicant and his family member tortured her for Rs. 5 lakhs and on 20.05.2023 informant was called at Khurj and when he arrived at Khurja then found that applicant and his family members after making assault administered some poison to his sister and his niece aged about two years. It is further mentioned in the FIR that the niece of the informant had died in the hospital and his sister is admitted in the hospital in serious condition.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is father of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation, he has been made accused in the present matter. He further submits that it is a case, in which, due to matrimonial dispute arose between husband and wife on minor issue in rash wife consumed some poison and she also administered poison to the minor daughter

¶11

aged about two years and immediately after the incident applicant admitted them in the hospital but unfortunately in spite of the best treatment provided by the applicant, the daughter of the applicant expired and his wife although survived but she started making allegation against the applicant.

¶12

He further submits that from the perusal of the statement of the wife of applicant recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., it although reflects that some dispute arose between husband and wife but she did not state that applicant administered poison to her and there is no evidence on record which can show that applicant administered poison to his wife and his daughter rather there is evidence that applicant is the person who admitted both of them in the hospital.

¶13

He further submits that applicant in the present matter lost his minor daughter and totally on the basis of false allegation, he has been made accused and he is in jail since 25.05.2023.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is husband of the injured and father of the deceased and it is a case, in which, he, as per allegation, administered poison to his wife and his daughter and luckily his wife survived but his daughter died but both could not dispute the fact that both of them have been admitted to the hospital by the applicant himself and in both the statements of the wife of applicant, she did not state that applicant administered poison to her and stated that applicant when pushed her then she lost her conscious. They further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 25.05.2023.

¶15

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

¶16

Although, applicant is father of the deceased and in the incident his wife also remained admitted in the hospital and as per allegation applicant administered poison to his wife and his daughter and during treatment his daughter died while his wife survived. From the statement of the wife recorded by the Magistrate and Investigating Officer, it appears that the relationship of applicant and his wife was not cordial and she stated that when she intervened the applicant while he was assaulting her daughter then he pushed her and thereafter she lost her conscious and she did not state that applicant administered poison to her and her daughter.

¶17

Further, from the record, it reflects that applicant after the incident admitted his wife and his daughter in the hospital but in the hospital his daughter died.

¶18

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, particularly the fact that applicant himself admitted his wife and daughter in the hospital and there is no evidence on record that applicant is the person who administered the poison either to his wife or the deceased, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶19

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

¶20

Let the applicant - Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Pratap Singh 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:-

¶21

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

¶22

(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.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

Order Date :- 11.10.2023 AK Pandey

¶27

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

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Pratap 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

Mukesh Vs State of U.P.

Ramjeet Vs State of U.P.

Mahendra Vishwakarma @ Chiraiya Doctor Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P.

Shamshad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmveer Vs State of U.P.and Another