Dinesh Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Aug 2024ABAIL/1921/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted interim anticipatory bail to applicant Dinesh Singh in a matrimonial dispute involving complicity of multiple sections. Finding the crux as potential false implication due to statement improvements, the court fixed conditions for bond and cooperation.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail subject to personal bond and two sureties, cooperation in investigation, reporting within 20 days, and not leaving India without permission.

Dinesh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1921 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Dinesh Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Singh,Mahendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

The present application has been filed by the applicant Dinesh Singh seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0048 of 2023 under Section 498-A, 323, 506, 354, 376, 120B Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Barabanki.

¶7

Supplementary Affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶8

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Satendra Singh Solanki, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record. His name shall be shown in the cause list when the case is next listed.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is fatherin-law. The dispute between the son of the applicant and the victim is purely matrimonial in nature.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no allegation of rape against the applicant, who is father-in-law, either in the F.I.R. or in the statement of the prosecution witness under Section 161 Cr.P.C. However, after making improvement for first time allegation of rape has been leveled in the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. along with the allegation on Nandoi also. During the course of investigation this statement has been found false by the Investigating Officer and name of the Nandoi has been dropped.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation.

¶13

Learned Addl. Government Advocate as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the facts that there is no allegation of rape in the F.I.R. or

¶14

in the statement of the prosecution witnesses. He further could not dispute that the name of Nandoi Vipin Singh has been dropped by the Investigating Officer.

¶15

Perused the record.

¶16

Considering the facts that the applicant is father-in-law, prima facie appears to be matrimonial dispute, statement of the victim suffers from improvement, the applicant might have been falsely implicated, as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020) 5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant.

¶17

Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned.

¶18

The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. The accused-applicant shall report to the concerned police station/investigating officer within twenty days from today and will remain present as and when the arresting officer /I.O./ S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶19

In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.

¶20

List on 18.9.2024.

¶21

In the meantime, learned counsel for the opposite parties shall file counter affidavit.

¶22

Order Date :- 27.8.2024 Madhu

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dinesh Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Singh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Meraj @ Bablu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Riti Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home. Deptt. Civil. Secy. Lko. and 3 Others

Moin and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin Secy. Home Lko.

U.P. State Industrial Development Authority,Trans Ganga City,Unnao Thru. Its Senior Project Officer vs Deepak Dwivedi

Pramod Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others