In behalf of Atique, counsel argued for bail in a case involving the death of his wife by throttling. The Court found no good or sufficient grounds to enlarge the applicant, noting the failure to prove innocence as an inmate, and rejected the application.
Bail application rejected. Applicant not enlarged on bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:234878
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44022 of 2023
Applicant :- Atique Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gayyoor Ali,Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
2. Perused the record.
Order Date :- 11.12.2023 Vinay
Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to enlargement on bail in a case involving death of wife by ante-mortem throttling under sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act.
Whether the applicant has discharged the burden of proving his innocence on account of being an inmate of the matrimonial house.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Atique
Rajeev Misra
Vinay Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
