Allowed

Deep Narain Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC8 Apr 2024/1499/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second bail application in a dowry death and cruelty case; trial not concluded despite a two-year direction, applicant in custody since 2020 with no criminal history. Bail granted on grounds of delayed trial affecting speedy trial rights.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000 each with standard conditions.

Deep Narain Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:28517

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1499 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Deep Narain Nishad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Rai,Ajai Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Rayees Ahmad, Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record.

¶8

This is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was dismissed on 3.11.2022 with direction to conclude the trial within two years.

¶9

While arguing the second bail application, learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.3.2020 for allegation of offence under Section 304-B which is punishable for a term of seven years and can go upto life imprisonment. He further argued that the sufÏcient having been lapsed and despite direction of this court, trial has not been concluded. The applicant is a government servant and there is no chance of the applicant fleeing away from the proceedings. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.3.2020 having no criminal history, may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the informant has argued that all the witnesses on behalf of the prosecution have already been examined and trial may be concluded in near future.

¶11

Considering the fact that despite directions

¶12

of this Court, the trial has not yet been concluded and the applicant is in custody since 11.3.2020 having no criminal history, prima facie the right to speedy trial has been adversely affected, thus on the ground of inordinate pre trial detention, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the second bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant Deep Narain Nishad be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.45 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Ibrahimpur, District Ambedkar Nagar on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶15

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶16

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 8.4.2024

¶19

Shukla

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Deep Narain Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deep Narain Nishad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Rahul Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Ram Lautan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow, U.P.

Vijay Kumar Rana Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Secy. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Master Shaarav Prasad Dahapute, Thru. Father Prasad Dahapute and Another Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Amit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and Others

Mohd. Mohsin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Others