Allowed

Dhananjay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Oct 2023BAIL/56965/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application regarding accusations of dowry death, the High Court directed the trial court to record the informant's statement within two months. Consequently, the applicant was granted bail with strict conditions regarding court attendance, evidence tampering, and prosecution delays.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and sureties, requiring recording of informant's statement within two months and completion of trial within one year.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:193910

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56965 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Dhananjay Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anshul Tiwari,Sr. Advocate,Veerendra Singh

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Dixit

¶6

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶7

Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Anshul Tiwari and Sri Veerendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Ajeet Dixit, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶8

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶9

There is allegation against the applicant of committing dowry death of his wife. The allegation is that the deceased was pushed down from the terrace of fourth floor, she fell down and died. The cause of commission of offence alleged against the deceased was unfulfilled demand of dowry.

¶10

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not present in the house at the time of alleged incident and had gone to attend a function in the family of matrimonial home of his brother. From the supplementary affidavit filed today, it appears that charges have been framed against the applicant only on 20.05.2023. Till date no prosecution witness has been examined. The applicant is in jail since 28.02.2021 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶11

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

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

¶13

fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 ; 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.

¶14

Let the applicant, Dhananjay Kumar Singh, involved in Case Crime No. 90 of 2021, under Sections- 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Jhunsi, District- Prayagraj, 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.

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall be enlarged on bail after the statement of informant is recorded by the trial Court. Trial Court is directed to record the statement of the informant within period of two months positively.

¶17

(iii) 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 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 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.

¶19

(v) 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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

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

¶24

Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.

¶25

Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days.

¶26

Order Date :- 9.10.2023 Rohit

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dhananjay Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhananjay Kumar Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indal Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Dharkar Vs State of U.P.

Badal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Akeel Ahmad @ Rehan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Shoib Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.