Allowed

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

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2024BAIL/307/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by the accused in a case of alleged abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC. The court held that there was no evidence of abetment as defined under Section 107 IPC and granted bail on personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each subject to conditions of attending hearings and not tampering with evidence.

Brijesh Kumar Prajapati vs the State of U.P. Thru… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2666

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 307 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Prajapati Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Deptt. Govt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Misra 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.0323 of 2023, under Section 306 IPC, P.S. Jalalpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶8

3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was married in the year 2013 with the applicant and it was informed that on 22.10.2023, the daughter of the informant had committed suicide by hanging.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the applicant draws my attention to the post-mortem report which discloses the cause of death as ante mortem hanging. The post-mortem report on record indicates four injuries which are ligature mark. In the light of the said, the submission of counsel for the applicant is that even for the sake of argument the allegations are treated to be correct, there is no averment with regard to abetment as defined under Section 107 IPC so as to implicate the applicant with the offence in question. He places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Mariano Anto Bruno and Anr. v. Inspector of Police; 2022 SCC OnLine 1387.

¶10

5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶11

6. Considering the fact that primarily there is no document which can be termed as abetment as defined under Section 107 IPC coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 23.10.2023, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶12

7. Let the applicant Brijesh Kumar Prajapati be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- 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 :- 10.1.2024 nishant

¶17

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

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.