Allowed¶11

Rafik v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Mar 2025BAIL/3697/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted; parity with co-accused; Section 439 Cr.P.C.; Sections 498-A, 304-B Indian Penal Code; Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act; dowry death; anti-mortem hanging; Case Crime No. 62 of 2024; P.S. Girwan, District Banda; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 3697 of 2025; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Sanjay Kumar Singh, J.; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:29536; decided 3.3.2025; applicant in custody since 02.07.2024; co-accused Johara and Raj Ali earlier granted bail (09.12.2024 / 13.12.2024).

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Rafik in Case Crime No. 62 of 2024 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions regarding attendance, non-tampering with evidence, abstention from criminal activity, and verification of sureties.

Rafik vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Rafik, arraigned in Case Crime No. 62 of 2024 under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act (P.S. Girwan, District Banda), is entitled to be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. during the pendency of trial.

¶7

Court's answer

Since co-accused Johara and Raj Ali, under similar accusation, have been granted bail, the applicant Rafik is also liable to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed and the applicant is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the enumerated conditions (attendance/cooperation with trial, no inducement or tampering, no criminal activity after release, verification of sureties, liberty to cancel bail on breach).

¶12

Key takeaways

The observations in the order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial.obiter¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh, J.) allowed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by Rafik, brother-in-law of the deceased Parween, arraigned along with Hamid, Johara and Raj Ali in Case Crime No. 62 of 2024 (P.S. Girwan, District Banda) under Sections 498-A and 304-B I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, alleging dowry demand and torture; death caused by asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging per post-mortem report. Holding that co-accused Johara (mother-in-law) and Raj Ali (father-in-law), facing similar accusations, had already been granted bail, the Court enlarged the applicant on the ground of parity, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, with conditions against tampering, inducement and further criminal activity. Observations confined to the question of bail only.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29536

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3697 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Rafik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kameshwar Singh,Sudhanshu Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State .

¶7

The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.62 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B of I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Girwan, District- Banda, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that complainant who is father of the deceased Parween lodged an F.I.R. on 02.03.2025 for the offence under Sections 498-A and 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P.Act against Hamid, Rafik (present applicant), Johara and Raj Ali who are husband, brother-in-law, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased respectively. General allegation of demand of dowry and torture have been levelled against all the accused persons without attributing any specific role to them. Information about the incident was given by father of the applicant to the parents of the deceased. As per post mortem report, cause of death of the deceased is asphyxia as a result of anti mortem hanging. Co-accused Johara and Raj Ali who are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased have been granted bail vide orders dated 09.12.2024 and 13.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 38254 of 2024 and 45762 of 2024 respectively. Case of the applicant stands on similar footing to that of aforesaid co-accused, therefore, the applicant who is languishing in jail since 02.07.2024 may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but does not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the

¶10

applicant.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that co-accused Johara and Raj Ali, under similar accusation, has been granted bail as noted above, therefore, the applicant is also liable to be released on bail on the ground of parity. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Rafik , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶14

(ii) That 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.

¶15

(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶16

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶18

It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial.

¶19

Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Asha

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rafik v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rafik v. State of U.P.

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

Manohar Singh vs State of U.P.

Hira Lal Ram vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajveer Singh vs State of U.P.

Umakant vs State of U.P.

Rajnath Singh vs State of U.P.

Utkarshini @ Pakhi (Minor) and Another vs State of U.P. and 4 Others