Allowed

Hanshram v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2023BAIL/53565/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application filed by Hanshram, father-in-law of the deceased, the Allahabad High Court considered the nature of the offence and evidence. Finding no convincing material to indicate tampering, the Court granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Hanshram was released on bail in Case Crime No. 207 of 2023 by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance and non-tampering with evidence.

Hanshram Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:236944

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53565 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Hanshram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Singh,Piyush Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Piyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bare Lal Bind, learned AGA 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 Hanshram, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 207 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Nawabganj, District Farrukhabad.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. It is argued that marriage of Smt. Munni Devi the deceased with Sumit Kumar the son of the applicant was solemnized on 21.6.2022. It is argued that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons. It is argued that the husband of the deceased has been arrested and is in jail. It is further argued that although the deceased was found to have received two abraded contusion, one abrasion and one contusion apart from single ligature mark, but the said injury did not contribute her death and the doctor has opined cause of death as asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. It is further argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case only being the family member of the husband of the deceased. It is argued that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-19 of the affidavit and is in jail since 15.8.2023.

¶10

Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased. Husband is in jail. Cause of death of the deceased is asphyxia as a result of ante mortem injury. General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against applicant.

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

¶13

Let the applicant- Hanshram, 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶20

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.

¶21

The bail application is allowed.

¶22

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 14.12.2023 Naresh

¶24

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

Hanshram v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanshram 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

Rashid Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Asha Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Vs State of U.P.

Satyam Vs State of U.P.

Chhote Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Surendra Yadav Vs State of U.P.