Allowed

Ankit v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2023BAIL/56031/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to the applicant accused of dowry death (Section 304-B IPC) and cruelty. The Court emphasized jail overcrowding, the nature of the suicide, and the applicant's lack of criminal history, allowing bail subject to strict conditions. The bail is allowed without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions to the satisfaction of the Court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56031 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ankit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Navin Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

There is allegation against the applicant of causing dowry death of his wife.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the deceased committed suicide after three and half years of marriage after bolting the door inside by way of hanging. Door was opened in the presence of Tehsildar and police. Thereafter dead body was taken out. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the deceased did not wanted to live in the village and she was pressurizing the applicant to sell his land and live in the city. She has left behind two & half years child who is to be looked after by the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 15.12.2021 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶8

Learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Ankit, involved in Session Trial No.277 of 2022, Case Crime No.267 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Bagvala, District- Etah be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses

¶13

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.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶18

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Order Date :- 3.2.2023 SS

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankit v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Jayanti @ Longshree and Another Vs State of U.P.

Kallu @ Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Prabha Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Jatav Vs State of U.P.

Asad Ali Vs State of U.P.

Javid Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others