Allowed

Harshvardhan Alias Vivek Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Jan 2025BAIL/1169/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under FIR alleging dowry-related offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant had no criminal history and was in custody since 15.9.2024. Relying on parity with a co-accused already bailed out and precedent principles on bail, the court granted bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with conditions regarding trial attendance and non-tampering

Harshvardhan Alias Vivek Kumar vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6506

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1169 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Harshvardhan Alias Vivek Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mangal Rai,Satyendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

1- lwph dks nksckjk iqdkjk x;kA

¶7

2- vkosnd ds vf/koDrk Jh lR;sUnz izrki flag ,oa vij ’kkldh; vf/koDrk Jh vfur dqekj ’kqDyk ds rdZ lqus rFkk vfHkys[kksa dk voyksdu fd;kA

¶8

3- vkosnd }kjk izFke lwpuk vk[;k la[;k& 0425 lu~ 2024 /kkjk& 85] 80(2), 115(2), 123 Hkkjrh; U;k; lafgrk] 2023 o /kkjk&3@4] ngst fu"ks/k vf/kfu;e] iqfyl LVs’ku fljlkxat] ftyk fQjkstkckn] esa tekur gsrq izkFkZuk&i= izLrqr fd;k gSA

¶9

4- vkosnd ds fo}ku vf/koDrk }kjk ;g rdZ izLrqr fd;k x;k gS fd lg&vfHk;qDr eukst dqekj dks bl U;k;ky; }kjk fofo/k tekur izkFkZuk&i= la[;k 47279 lu 2024 esa ikfjr vius vkns’k fnuk¡d 3-1-2025 ls tekur ij fjgk fd;k tk pqdk gSA vkosnd dk dksbZ vkijkf/kd bfrgkl ugha gSA og fnuk¡d 15-9-2024 ls tsy esa fu#) gSA

¶10

5- vkxs ;g Hkh rdZ izLrqr fd;k x;k gS fd pwafd vkosnd dh Hkwfedk lg&vfHk;qDr ds leku gS] ftls igys gh tekur ij fjgk fd;k tk pqdk gS] vr% lekurk ds vk/kkj ij izkFkhZ Hkh tekur ikus dk vf/kdkjh gSA

¶11

6- jkT; dh vksj ls tekur dk fojks/k fd;k x;k gS] gkykafd vkosnd ds lg&vfHk;qDr ls lekurk ds rF;kRed igyw dk fojks/k ugha fd;k x;k gSA

¶12

7- bl U;k;ky; }kjk uUgk iq= ukHkk [kk¡ cuke mÙkj izns’k ljdkj 1993 fØfeuy ykW tuZy 938 esa ,oa mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk ikjl jke fcÜuksbZ cuke funs’kd] dsUnzh; vUos’k.k C;wjks MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 rFkk lrsUnj dqekj vafry cuke dsUnzh; tk¡p C;wjks o vU;] 2022 vkbZ-,u-,l-lh- 690 esa izfrikfnr fl)kUr] izdj.k ds rF;ksa rFkk ifjfLFkfr;ksa vkSj xq.k nks"k ij dksbZ vfHker O;Dr u djrs gq, U;k;ky; dh jk; esa vkonsd lekurk ds vk/kkj ij tekur ikus dk vf/kdkjh gSA

¶13

8- lekurk ds vk/kkj ij vkosnd dk tekur izkFkuk&i= Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA

¶14

9- mijksDr vijk/k la[;k ds ekeys esa lafyIr vkosnd g"kZo/kZu mQZ foosd dqekj dks fuEufyf[kr’krksZa ds v/khu lacaf/kr U;k;ky; dh larqf’V ds fy, ,d O;fDrxr ckaM vkSj leku jkf’k ds nks izfrHkw izLrqr djus ij tekur ij fjgk fd;k tk,A

¶15

(i) vkosnd lk{; ds lkFk NsM+NkM+ ugha djsxkA

¶16

(ii) vkosnd (1) ekeys dks izkjEHk djus] (2) vkjksi r; djus vkSj (3) /kkjk 313 lhvkjihlh ds rgr c;ku ntZ djus ds fy, fu/kkZfjr frfFk;k a s ij] O;fDrxr :i ls] fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k mifLFkr jgsxkA ;fn fopkj.k U;k;ky; dh jk; esa vkosnd dh vuqifLFkfr tkucw>dj ;k i;kZIr dkj.k ds fcuk gS] rks mlds ;g NwV gksxh fd og bl rjg dh pwd dks tekur dh Lora=rk dk nq:i;ksx ekurs gq, mlds fo:) dkuwu ds vuqlkj dk;Zokgh djsaA

¶17

10- mijksDr’krksZa esa ls fdlh ds mYya?ku ds ekeys esa] ;g tekur jÌ djus dk vk/kkj gksxkA izfrHkwfr Lohdkj fd;s tkus ls igys vkosnd vkSj tekurnkjksa dh igpku ]fLFkfr vkSj fuokl izek.k lacaf/kr U;k;ky; }kjk lR;kfir fd;k tk,xkA

¶18

Order Date :- 15.1.2025

¶19

Shalini

¶20

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶21

2 of 2

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harshvardhan Alias Vivek Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harshvardhan Alias Vivek Kumar v. State of U.P.

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

Santosh Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Santosh Gupta @ Santosh Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Devesh Sharma vs State of U.P.

Monish vs State of U.P.

Hiralal vs State of U.P.

Nilesh Alias Kiran Yashwant Suryavanshi vs State of U.P. and Another