Allowed

Vinnami v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC24 Nov 2023BAIL/47710/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Samit Gopal, J. allowed the bail application of Vinnami, a 66-year-old father-in-law, in a dowry death case under Sections 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. The court found no convincing material suggesting evidence tampering and released him on bail with personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding non-tampering with evidence and presence in court for evidence recording.

Vinnami Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:223098

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47710 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vinnami Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Tiwari,Pranshu Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and 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- Vinnami , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 336 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Harduaganj, District Aligarh.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased Smt. Gudiya. She has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the marriage of Gudiya the daughter of the first informant was solemnized with Deep Singh the son of the applicant on 10.05.2022. It is further argued that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and all the accused persons. The deceased committed suicide which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, the deceased has received a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death has been opined as cardio pulmonary arrest due to antemortem hanging. It is argued while placing paragraph 22 of the affidavit that the applicant is aged about 66 years and is suffering from old age problems. It is further argued that Deep Singh the husband of the deceased is in jail. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 28 of the affidavit and is in jail since 14.07.2023.

¶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 along with other accused persons and there are allegations against him.

¶11

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and other accused persons in the first information report. The husband of the deceased is in jail.

¶12

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

¶13

tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Let the applicant- Vinnami , 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 to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶21

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.

¶22

The bail application is allowed .

¶23

Order Date :- 24.11.2023 AS Rathore

¶24

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinnami v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinnami 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

Harish Chand Vs State of U.P.

Bhola Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Prem Shankar Vs State of U.P.

Babloo Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Musarraf Vs State of U.P.