Allowed

Vinod Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC9 Aug 2023BAIL/7415/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding cases of dowry harassment and death of a wife, the Allahabad High Court allowed the release of the applicant. The court noted the absence of a post-mortem report, the delayed FIR via section 156(3) Cr.P.C., and hostile witness statements while dismissing the need to express an opinion on the case merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, subject to conditions of appearance and non-interference with witnesses.

Vinod Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:160755

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7415 of 2021

¶4

Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vineeta Devi,Krishna Shankar,Pankaj Kumar Yadav,Satish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhishek Mishra,Surendra Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

None appeared on behalf of the informant even in the revised call. However, learned AGA for the State-respondent is present.

¶7

Heard Sri Krishna Shankar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 715 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 304B, 201 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Allahabad, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and his family members on 10.7.2019 through an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated 2.7.2019 and according to the FIR, marriage of the applicant was performed with the deceased on 30.4.2013 and after marriage deceased was tortured by the applicant and his family members for Rs. 50,000/- and on 6.1.2019 informant received an information that applicant and his family members are trying to cremate the dead body of the deceased and when she arrived at spot then found that her daughter was lying in dead condition and when she objected then applicant and his family members locked her in the room with her another daughter and thereafter they have disposed of

¶10

the dead body of her daughter i.e. deceased and in spite of the best effort of the informant, her FIR was not lodged and ultimately she moved and application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 2.7.2019.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that totally on the basis of false allegation after more than one month, an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was lodged against the applicant and his family members and thereafter FIR of the present case was lodged.

¶12

He further submitted that applicant neither demanded any dowry nor he ever harassed his wife i.e. deceased and totally on the basis of false allegation of demand of dowry and harassment, he has been made accused in the present matter after about more than one month.

¶13

He next submitted that actually deceased i.e. wife of the applicant is acute anaemic and therefore, she died and after her death, applicant and his family members informed the informant and her family members and after receiving information, they arrived and in their presence cremation was done but after about one month totally on the basis of false allegation application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved.

¶14

He further submitted that although in the FIR and in the statements recorded during investigation, prosecution witnesses made allegation of demand of dowry and torture against the applicant and his family members but when informant and sister of the deceased appeared before the trial court then they did not support the prosecution case and have declared hostile. He further submitted that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 19.6.2020 i.e. for more than three years.

¶15

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on fact advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

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

¶17

Although, applicant is husband of deceased and his wife died within seven years of her marriage and there is also allegation of demand of dowry but as dead body of the deceased has been disposed of, therefore, there is no post mortem on record which can show that deceased died abnormal death and as per learned counsel for the applicant deceased died due to illness and after her death, informant was duly informed and in her presence, cremation was done. The argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant also finds support from the statement of the informant recorded before the trial court.

¶18

From the statement of the informant and sister of the deceased recorded before the trial court it appears that both have declared hostile and they did not support the prosecution case. Further, FIR of the present case was lodged through an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and even application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved after more than a month and applicant in present matter is in jail since June, 2020 i.e. for more than three years.

¶19

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is although husband of the deceased but he is entitled to be released on bail.

¶20

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits

¶21

of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶22

Let the applicant- Vinod Kumar Gupta , be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶23

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶24

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶25

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶26

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶27

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.

¶28

Order Date :- 9.8.2023

¶29

Ankita

¶30

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinod Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar Gupta 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

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Raju Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ram Pal Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Verma Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kishore @ Duriya Vs State of U.P.