Shiv Raj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:704

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16 of 2025 Applicant :- Shiv Raj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Lalji Prasad Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Lalji Prasad Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Diwakar Singh, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 02.07.2024 in Case Crime/ FIR No.357 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Maholi, District – Sitapur.

¶7

3.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant, who is father-in-law of the victim (since deceased), has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR wherein general allegations of demanding dowry and cruelty have been levelled against the entire family including the present applicant. No specific role has been attributed to the present applicant. As a matter of fact, the present applicant was having cordial relations with the victim (since deceased) and has not demanded any dowry from her or her family members. Cause of death is hanging. There is no ante-mortem injury on the body of the victim except one ligature mark around the neck, which might have been caused due to hanging. Further, he had nothing to do with the family affairs of his son or his wife and he is absolutely unaware about the reason as to why his daughter-in-law had died from hanging. There is no previous criminal history of any kind whatsoever against the present applicant. Further, the applicant undertakes that if he is released on bail, he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order.

¶8

Learned A.G.A has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that the present applicant is father-in-law of the deceased, no specific allegation has been levelled against him; there is no ante-mortem injury on the body

¶10

of the victim except the ligature mark; the applicant is having no previous criminal history of any kind whatsoever and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

Let applicant- Shiv Raj be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.

¶18

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶19

Order Date :- 6.1.2025 /RBS/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shiv Raj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Raj v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Padum Prakash Mishra and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Finance Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Bade Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Basic Education Lko. and Another

Rajendra Prasad Pandey and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Finance Govt. Lko and 4 Others

Ankit Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Adil Ansari vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Sita Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko