Allowed

Tinku v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2024BAIL/2133/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant in a case concerning dowry harassment and death. The application was allowed despite the death of the informant's daughter, noting the absence of a counter-affidavit and the co-accused having already been granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was granted bail in Crime No. 0140 of 2022 to furnish a bail bond and two sureties.

Tinku vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:24132

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2133 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Tinku Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, the learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.

¶7

2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 0140 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kadipur Kotwali, District Sultanpur.

¶8

3. The FIR lodged against the applicant and his father Banarasi states that the informant had got her daughter Anshu married to the applicant on 12.06.2021; that the accused persons used to harass the daughter of the informant for demand of additional dowry and that on 15.04.2022, elder son of the applicant informed the informant about the murder of his daughter.

¶9

4. In the postmortem examination report, the only injury reported on the dead body is a ligature mark around its neck.

¶10

5. By means of the order dated 27.02.2024 the State was granted 2 weeks' time for filing a counter affidavit but the State has not filed any counter affidavit.

¶11

6. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has falsely been implicated in the present case and that he has no previous criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.05.2022.

¶12

7. Co-accused Banarasi Harijan has been granted bail by this Court

¶13

by means of the order dated 24.03.2023 passed in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.2587 of 2023.

¶14

8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the FIR has been lodged on the basis of suspicion; that the informant's daughter has been killed by the accused persons, there are no witnesses of alleged demand of dowry and that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 29.05.2022, a co-accused has been granted bail by this Court, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

9. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed.

¶16

10. Let the applicant Tinku be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0140 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kadipur Kotwali, District Sultanpur on furnishing a bail bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject o following conditions:-

¶17

(i) the applicant shall not temper with the prosecution evidence;

¶18

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶19

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his appearance is exempted by the trial court.

¶20

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 19.3.2024 prateek

¶22

Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Tinku v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tinku v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Sultan Hussain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Afasar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home)/Prin. Secy. (Home), Lucknow and 3 Others

Geeta Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Smt. Anuradha Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Mohd. Faizan Khan and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another