Allowed

Pappu v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2024/2940/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of Pappu, an accused in a case regarding dowry death and suicide. The court observed that while the deceased died by hanging, the applicant was entitled to bail. The order fixes conditions for bail and disclaims an opinion on the case's merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Pappu is released on bail in Connection No. 48 of 2023 on personal bond and two sureties.

Pappu Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:53589

¶2

Court No. - 32

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2940 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Pappu Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Tripathi 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 Rajdeep Singh learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.48 of 2023 (S.T. No. 649 of 2023) under Sections 498A,304B IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Naimisharanya District Sitapur.

¶9

4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that general allegation for demand of additional dowry of motorcycle has been levelled against the application and his family members by the complainant, who is father of the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the deceased wanted to go to her parental house on the date of incident but the applicant could not cater her demand,therefore, she committed suicide by hanging. He has submitted that postmortem report indicates that death is not natural, rather she died due to hanging and she did not receive any external injury except the ligature mark, which was caused due to hanging. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that mother-in-law and father-in-law, who were accused in the present case, have already been bail by this Court. The applicant has no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 23.02.2023. He also submitted that there is no likelihood to conclude the trial in near future.

¶10

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has

¶11

submitted that death was caused due to hanging as such the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

6. 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 deceased committed suicide by hanging and the argument that as per postmortem report, no injury was found on the body of deceased except the ligature mark, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail .

¶13

7. The bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶14

8. Let applicant, namely, Pappu , 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 :-

¶15

(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 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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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

¶19

default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

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.

¶21

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 5.8.2024 dk/

¶23

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

Pappu v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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. Chandra Wati and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Amitabh Thakur vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Tanveer Ahmad Alias Manu Sarkar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Pappu vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

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

Smt. Neha @ Neha Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.S Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another