Allowed

Vishnu Prasad Shahu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Oct 2024/6000/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application allowed. High Court released the applicant on bail in a dowry death case where trial remained pending despite prior direction to conclude evidence within four months, noting the complete non-examination of remaining witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties; trial court directed to conclude trial expeditiously.

Vishnu Prasad Shahu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70373

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6000 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vishnu Prasad Shahu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Singh Rana,Jaikaran,Sudhakar Mishra

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

This is the third bail application of the applicant and his second bail application bearing no.14826 of 2022 was rejected by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.12.2022.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶9

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.0383 of 2021 under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of DP Act, Police Station Salon, District Raebareli with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 08.10.2021. He further submitted that marriage of applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant of the present case and from their wedlock, one girl child was born and they were enjoying their matrimonial life. But one day prior to the date of incident, some dispute was taken place between them and daughter of the informant started quarreling on the ground that she was not being allowed to go to her maternal home, and thereafter, some skirmish was started and both the applicant as well as daughter of informant received injuries. And the other day, daughter of informant committed suicide. The information of her suicide was given to the police as well as the informant and other family members, but due to announce, the FIR was lodged by the informant. He further submitted that the first bail application of applicant was rejected by this court on 28.03.2022, and thereafter, the second bail application of the applicant bearing No.14826 of 2022 was rejected by the Coordinate Bench of this Court on 19.12.2022 with direction to the trial court to proceed with the trial proceedings and record the evidence of the witnesses of fact, preferably within a period of

¶11

four months, but till today, the evidence of witnesses of fact has not been completed, as only three witnesses have been examined out of 30 witnesses. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal antecedent, charge sheet has already been filed and there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learning AGA opposed the prayer of applicant and submitted that seven injuries were found on the body of deceased. He further submitted that after considering all the facts, first and second bail applications of the applicant were rejected, but he does not dispute the fact that direction was given to the trial court to proceed with the trial proceedings and record the evidence of the witnesses of fact, preferably within a period of four months.

¶13

Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record, contents of the F.I.R., other relevant documents as well as totality of fact and circumstances, it is evident that applicant does not have any criminal history and he is in jail since 08.10.2021. It is also evident that at the time of rejecting the second bail application of the applicant, trial court was directed to proceed with the trial proceedings and record the evidence of the witnesses of fact, preferably within a period of four months. But till today, only 3 out of 30 witnesses have been examined, therefore I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Let applicant - Vishnu Prasad Shahu - be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶16

(ii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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

¶18

abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶19

(iv) 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 IPC.

¶20

(v) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶21

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶22

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

Trial court is directed to conclude trial, expeditiously without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

¶24

Order Date :- 18.10.2024 V. Sinha

¶25

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vishnu Prasad Shahu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu Prasad Shahu 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

Similar cases

Rakesh Tripathi @ Rakesh Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Mohd. Hasnain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mohammad Waseem Alias Waseem Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vinod Kumar Tewari Vs State of U.P. and Others

Rama Kant Verma and Ors. Vs State of U.P and Anr.

Harjinder Kaur and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another