Allowed

Satya Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Allahabad HC3 Oct 2024BAIL/10592/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 498A and 304B IPC, the court allowed the release of the accused husband. The court accepted arguments that postmortem injuries suggested accidental death, noting no criminal history or threat to the trial, and granted bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each, subject to conditions of attendance, no new offences, and no inducement to tamper with evidence.

Satya Prakash vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:72953

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10592 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Satya Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Tiwari,Narvind Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.804 of 2023, under Section 498A, 304B of IPC & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Bachrawan, District Rae Bareli.

¶8

3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that daughter of the informant was married to the applicant around three years ago and sufficient dowry was also given, however, the entire matrimonial family used to demand dowry and they killed her to death with the use of gas kept in the kitchen.

¶9

4. In the light of the said, learned counsel for the applicant draws my attention to the postmortem report which records burn injury on the entire body of the victim and no other injury was noticed. He further draws my attention to the recovery memo whereby from the room in question, a gas stove, gas regulator and half burnt clothes were found. In the light of the said, the submission of counsel for the applicant is that it is a case of accidental death as there is neither any material to suggest any resistance by the victim nor was there any injury witnessed. He further argues that the injuries as per the postmortem report are on account of cooking gas which cannot be administered by the applicant. It is lastly argues that the coaccused have been enlarged on bail, although, the applicant does not claim parity with them. The applicant is husband of the deceased.

¶10

5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶11

6. Considering the postmortem report indicating no other injury and the burn injuries are likely to be possible on account of accidental burn, as such, the applicant who has no criminal history, is in custody since 19.11.2023 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant, if enlarged on bail at this stage, can in any way adversely affect the trial, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶12

7. Let the applicant Satya Prakash be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶14

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶15

(c) 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.

¶16

Order Date :- 5.11.2024

¶17

nishant

¶18

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Satya Prakash v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Prakash v. 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

Sirtaj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Mohit Kevat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Anand Singh Alias Jhinaku Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Dheeraj Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Vinay Tiwari @ Golu Tiwari Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sohan Lal Prajapati Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko