Allowed

Amar Singh @ Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Home, Lucknow

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2024BAIL/5190/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application, the Allahabad High Court considered a case involving suicide allegations under Section 498A IPC. Relying on the post-mortem report and the applicant's claim that the deceased committed suicide due to illness, the court granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount subject to specific conditions of attendance and undertaking.

Amar Singh @ Rakesh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:54034

¶2

Court No. - 32

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5190 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Amar Singh @ Rakesh Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. Of Home, Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Pratap Singh,Abhishek Singh,Zia Ul Qayuim Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. Case has been taken up through video conferencing.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Gyanendra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.0495 of 2022 under Sections 498A,304B IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Pali District Hardoi.

¶9

4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the deceased committed suicide by consuming oregano phosphorus insecticide. He has submitted that initially an information was given by the father-in-law of the deceased, but later on an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed by father of the deceased after 20 days i.e. on 20.09.2022 whereas the deceased died on 09.09.2022. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that an information about death was given by the father of the complainant to the family members of the deceased and the postmortem was conducted and as per postmortem report, no internal or external injury was found on the person of the deceased and viscera was preserved. Later on, as per viscera report, oregano phosphorus insecticide was found on the body of the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that due to illness, the deceased was under depression and the applicant had tried his best to provide her medical treatment. In support of his contention, he has also filed Admission Register of Katiyar Nursing Home, Dharmshala Road, Hardoi, which indicates

¶10

that deceased was brought to the Hospital. Learned counsel for the the applicant has submitted that general allegation of additional demand of dowry of motorcycle has been levelled in the FIR.The applicant has no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 24.04.203.

¶11

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that it is a case of dowry death as such the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and after hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking into overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the argument that the deceased committed suicide; the argument that no internal or external injuries were found on the body of the deceased and the deceased was suffering from illness that is why she committed suicide and the argument that death is not unnatural after looking into the postmortem report, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

7. The bail application of the applicant is allowed .

¶14

8. Let applicant, namely, Amar Singh @ Rakesh Singh , be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then

¶18

the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The Trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything in this order.

¶21

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 6.8.2024 dk/

¶23

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

Amar Singh @ Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of Home, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Singh @ Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Deptt. of 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

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

Pappu Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Bhallu Alias Virendra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Sakrun Nisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mansoor Alam Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.N Home Lko and Another

Qumar Jahan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko