Allowed

Ram Chander v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2024BAIL/122/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by the father-in-law accused under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act in his daughter-in-law's death. The court noted his separate living, absence of evidence of dowry harassment soon before death, long custody and clean record, and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail in FIR No.240 of 2023 on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.25,000 each, subject to conditions on attendance, non-repetition and no tampering.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:16515

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 122 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Chander Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

In terms of the F.I.R., it was alleged that the sister of the informant was married to the applicant on 3.5.2023 and sufficient dowry was also given. However, the sister of the informant was killed.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the post mortem report on record indicates cause of death as ante mortem throttling. As many as six injuries were visible on the body of the deceased. It is further argued that the applicant is the father-in-law and has a separate living from his son and daughter-in-law which is duly certified by the certificate as contained in Annexure No.1 to the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 14.6.2023 and the applicant has no criminal history, hence the applicant may be released on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Considering the post mortem report coupled with the fact that the applicant is the father-in-law having separate living and that there is nothing on record to allege that soon before the death, the applicant has subjected the deceased to any physical or mental harassment in relation to the demand of dowry particularly the fact that the applicant is in custody since 14.7.2023 and has no criminal history and there is nothing on record to

¶11

demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Ram Chander be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.240 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Bakshi Ka Talaab, District Lucknow on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

Order Date :- 23.2.2024

¶18

Shukla

¶19

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

Ram Chander v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Chander v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

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

Mohd. Akeel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4OTHERS

Chhotu Alias Umesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Shishupal Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Harshendra Singh @ Raja Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Shyam Bihari @ Shyam Kishor Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Brijesh Kumar Prajapati Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Deptt. Govt. Lko.