Allowed

Manish Kumar Verma @ Chhotu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC31 Jul 2024/2647/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a second bail application filed by an accused in a dowry death case. The accused alleged suicide after five years of marriage without prior dowry allegations. Considering the length of jail term and lack of external injuries, the Court granted bail without expressing an opinion on case merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to strict appearance conditions.

Manish Kumar Verma @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:52399

¶2

Court No. - 32

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2647 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Manish Kumar Verma @ Chhotu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Manjusha Kapil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. Case has been taken up through video conferencing.

¶7

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Gyanandra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

3. This is second bail application and the first bail application got rejected for want of prosecution by this Court vide order dated 30.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10292 of 2021.

¶9

4. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.133 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 302 IPC and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District Barabanki.

¶10

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that complainant, brother of the deceased, lodged the FIR, making general allegation of dowry demand after six years of marriage. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that P.W.1, complainant deposed before the trial court that from Tilak to Marriage there was no dispute and his sister had gone to her 'Sasural'. P.W.-1/ complainant further deposed that accused applicant used to ply car on commercial basis. He used to go out side for 2-3 days and his sister used to get boredom and was suffering from illness. Sometimes she was also provided medical assistance and she was also treated in her 'Sasural' by the applicant. It has been submitted that postmortem reports of

¶11

5 years baby child Kriti and the deceased indicate that no external injury was found on the person of deceased as well as her child except ligature mark. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the deceased committed suicide and prior to that she hanged her daughter and thereafter she hanged herself as she was frustrated and ill. One cannot believe that father will kill his own daughter without any motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that prior to present case, no allegation of dowry demand was ever made nor any report has been lodged by the deceased or the family members of the deceased and the marriage between the applicant and deceased was done prior to seven years. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 04.03.2020.

¶12

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that it is a case of dowry death where mother and child have been killed by the applicant because body of both the deceased were found in the house of the applicant, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the argument that no external injury was found on the person of both the deceased except ligature mark, which was caused due to hanging; argument that deceased committed suicide by hanging and death is not unnatural in any manner and the argument that the applicant is in jail for the last about 4 ½ years, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

8. The bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶15

9. Let applicant, namely, Manish Kumar Verma @ Chhotu , be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

(i) 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

¶17

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

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 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

(iii) 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

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of 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.

¶21

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order.

¶22

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 31.7.2024 dk/

¶24

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

Manish Kumar Verma @ Chhotu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar Verma @ Chhotu 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

Smt Rani Devi vs State of Up and 5 Others

Sanjai vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ravi Prakash Awasthi @ Ravi Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Manish Kumar Verma @ Chhotu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Faiz Alam @ Billu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Ankit Yadav vs the State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko