Allowed

Paras Babu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2023BAIL/46116/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal revisional bail application filed by father-in-law of deceased in dowry death case wherein court granted bail subject to personal bond sureties and conditions including non-tampering restrictions and strict attendance requirements.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions prohibiting tampering ensuring appearance and strictly adhering to trial dates with specific consequences for

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:208882

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46116 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Paras Babu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Tripathi,Rajeev Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Vijay Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Paras Babu, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 444 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C.and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at Police Station South (Dachhin), District Firozabad.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased Arti Yadav. The marriage of the deceased was solemnized with Lokendra Yadav the son of the applicant on 02.05.2023. It is argued that the general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant. It is argued in the postmortem report a single injury being a ligature mark has been found on the body of the deceased and the doctor has opined the cause of death due to antimortem hanging. He further argued that the applicant has a criminal history of one case in which he has been granted bail as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 11.08.2023.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the First Information Report and there are allegations against him.

¶11

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of

¶12

antimortem hanging. No other bodily injury has been found on the body of the deceased except for a ligature mark.

¶13

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let the applicant Paras Babu , 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 concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., 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, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.

¶19

(v) 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 him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶20

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try

¶21

to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶22

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶23

The bail application is allowed .

¶24

Order Date :- 1.11.2023 M. ARIF

¶25

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Paras Babu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Paras Babu 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

Teajo @ Teajpal Vs State of U.P.

Aladeen Ahmad Alias Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Shamshul Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Brahma Devi @ Rammurti Vs State of U.P.