Allowed

Rahul Pathak and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Aug 2024ABAIL/8154/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous application sought anticipatory bail for a husband, father-in-law, and sister-in-law facing charges underSections 498A IPC and others allegedly for dowry dispute and acid attack. The court found no material to show gravity of allegations or danger to society and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each, subject to conditions of appearing for interrogation and not obstructing investigation.

Rahul Pathak and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:143680

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 8154 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rahul Pathak And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar Singh,Viveka Nand Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned AGA and perused the material available on record.

¶7

The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants - Rahul Pathak, Jay Prakash Pathak and Pooja Pathak in Case Crime No. 192 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 307 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station - Lohta, District - Varanasi.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant no. 1 is husband, applicant no. 2 is father-in-law and applicant no. 3 is sister-in-law and there is a dispute between husband and wife. The allegations are general in nature with regard to demand of dowry. It is also alleged that the wife was administered acid on 19.10.2022. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the wife herself administered acid and the husband had admitted her to the hospital. It is further submitted that thereafter wife was living with the applicant no. 1, however, on account of dispute in the marriage the present FIR has been lodged. Applicants have no previous criminal history. It is further submitted by learned counsel for applicants that applicants are innocent and have no concern with the present matter. Allegations levelled against the applicants are false. No prima facie case is made out against the applicants. If the applicants are enlarged on anticipatory bail, they will not misuse the liberty and cooperate with the investigation. The applicants have apprehension of their arrest by the police any time.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer but does not dispute the factual matrix.

¶10

It is not shown by learned AGA that the offence in question will have impact on society at large. It is not shown that act causes harm to the society. The accusations arise out of dispute between individuals. It is not shown by learned AGA that the nature and gravity of allegations are such that the same would disentitle the applicants for relief of anticipatory bail. Learned AGA has not raised concern that any prejudice would be caused to free, fair and full investigation in the event the applicants are granted anticipatory bail. No material, facts, circumstances or concern been shown by learned AGA for the State that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses or accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or that accused will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence.

¶11

Learned counsel for opposite parties has not placed any criminal antecedents of the applicants. The applicants have no criminal history.

¶12

It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicants fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.

¶13

In view of the above, the applicants are granted anticipatory bail in respect of offence described in para 2 of the present order. In the event of arrest of the applicants, they shall be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police office as and when required.

¶15

(ii) The applicants 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 themselves from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office.

¶16

(iii) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court concerned.

¶17

(iv) In the event, applicants change residential address, the

¶18

applicants shall inform the court concerned/Investigating Officer about new residential address in writing.

¶19

(v) The applicants shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required.

¶20

(vi) The applicants shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police.

¶21

(vii) The applicants shall maintain law and order.

¶22

(viii) The applicants shall at the time of execution of the bond, furnish their address and mobile number to investigating officer, and the court concerned.

¶23

(ix) The applicants shall regularly remain present during the trial, and cooperate with the Court to complete the trial for the above offences.

¶24

(x) Non presence of the applicants or their counsel before the court concerned shall be construed as violation of the present order and the court concerned would be at liberty to take coercive measures in accordance with law.

¶25

In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of protection granted to the applicants.

¶26

With the directions made above, the anticipatory bail application stands allowed .

¶27

Order Date :- 4.9.2024 VMA

¶28

Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Pathak and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Pathak and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Pushpendra Singh @ Pushpendra Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Sandeep Chaubey vs State of Up and Another

Vikash vs State of U.P.

Punni @ Peter @ Shivam vs State of Up and Another

Neval Kishor vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahis Ahmad and Another vs State of U.P. and Another