Allowed

Vishal Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2024/1292/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail. The court granted bail to the applicant in a case alleging dowry harassment and cruelty under relevant IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act sections, subject to standard conditions and personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond and two solvent sureties subject to conditions of interrogation, non-interference, non-travel without permission, court appearance, and no intimidation of wi

Vishal Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48595

¶2

Court No. - 31

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1292 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vishal Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Manish Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Punit Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.126 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 313 I.P.C., 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered at Police Station Kunda, District Pratapgarh.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 21.04.2017, against four persons, including the applicant, his father, mother and sister alleging that informant got married to the applicant on 22.02.2016; that all the accused persons used to harass her for dowry demand and they forcibly turned her out from her matrimonial home on 27.05.2016.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bailapplication, it has been contended that the applicant is innocent, he has falsely been implicated in the present case because of matrimonial dispute between the applicant and the informant and

¶10

that he has no criminal history. All the three other co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail and copies of their bail orders have been annexed with the affidavit filed in support of the application for anticipatory bail.

¶11

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter. 6. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant got married to the applicant on 22.02.2016; that even as per the F.I.R. allegations the informant was turned out of her matrimonial home on 27.05.2016; that the accused persons had threatened the informant in her home on 13.11.2016 and the F.I.R. has been lodged on 21.04.2017; that all the other co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail and that the applicant has no criminal history and without making any observations which may affect the outcome of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be grated anticipatory bail.

¶12

In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed . In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant-Vishal Kumar Gupta before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court:

¶13

(i). that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

(ii) that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the

¶15

facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

(iii) hat the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court'

¶17

(iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and

¶18

(v). that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶19

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 18.7.2024 Ram.

¶21

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vishal Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Kumar Gupta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Deen Mohammad @ Nanhe Babu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Vivek Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, U.P. Lko. and Another

Smt. Prabha Pandey vs Competent Authority/Special Land Acquisition Officer, District- Barabanki and Anr.

Neeraj Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P. Lucknow

Jagat Ram Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Vishal Kumar Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another