Sanni Panchal Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:152233

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7404 of 2023

Applicant :- Sanni Panchal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prayogendra Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri P.P. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 1076 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and his family members and according to the FIR court marriage of the applicant was performed with the deceased and when on 14.12.2020 informant went to meet her then applicant and his family members demanded Rs. 50,000/- and due to want of dowry they have thrown the deceased from flyover due to which she died.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is husband of the deceased and entire allegation of demand of dowry and torture made against him is totally false and baseless and actually deceased by accident fell from flyover and died but subsequently totally on the basis of false allegation applicant has been made accused in the present matter. He further submits that applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 16.12.2020 i.e. for more than two and half years.

¶10

He further submits that during trial when the informant appeared before the trial court then although during examination-in-chief he supported the version of the FIR but during cross examination he did not support his earlier version.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is the husband of the deceased and

¶12

allegation against him are serious in nature and post mortem report of the deceased suggests that it is a case of homicidal death and if due to accident deceased died by falling from flyover then being husband it was duty of the applicant to inform the police but he did not either inform the police or the informant, therefore, he does not deserve bail.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

Although, from the record it reflects that informant of the case during his cross examination did not support his earlier version but it appears that he was cross examined after about two months from his examination-in-chief and in his examination-in-chief he fully supported the version of the FIR.

¶15

Further, applicant is the husband of the deceased and post mortem report suggests that deceased died due to anti mortem injuries and she sustained number of injuries, therefore, I find force in the argument advanced by learned AGA that at this stage it cannot be said that deceased fell accidentally from flyover as if deceased would have been died due to accidental fall from flyover then applicant being husband would have definitely informed the informant and the police but there is no such evidence on record in this record.

¶16

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected.

¶18

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶19

Order Date :- 28.7.2023 AK Pandey

¶20

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

Sanni Panchal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanni Panchal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bheem Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh @ Akshat Raj Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Seth Vs State of U.P.

Omendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Leelawati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others