Rohit vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41376

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6614 of 2025

Applicant :- Rohit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandan Singh,Harikrishna Tiwari,Narendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Narendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure / under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Rohit , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 159 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Makkhanpur, District Firozabad.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued as follows:-

¶10

(i) The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶11

(ii) The applicant is the devar of the deceased Smt. Sunita.

¶12

(iii) The marriage of the deceased Sunita was solemnized with Rinku brother of the applicant in July 2022.

¶13

(iv) General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant.

¶14

(v) The deceased as per the postmortem examination report was found to be having missing body parts and there was amputation of some parts and also crushed injury. The cause of death is haemorrhage due to shock as a result of antemortem injury.

¶15

(vi) Rinku the husband of the deceased is not an accused in the matter.

¶16

(vii) While placing paragraph 13 of the affidavit it is submitted that the applicant is involved in one other case but he has been granted bail by the trial court concerned, the copy of the said order is annexed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 19.09.2024.

¶17

(viii) Co-accused Anurag @ Chuhiya the cousin brother-in-law (devar) and Devendra Singh the chachia sasur of the deceased have been granted bail by a co-

¶18

ordinate of this Court vide orders dated 29.11.2024 and 10.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 42523 of 2024 and 44190 of 2024, copy of the orders are annexed as Annexure-5 to the affidavit.

¶19

(ix) The present case is a case in which the deceased in a state of depression committed suicide by jumping on the railway track.

¶20

Per contra , learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶21

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the devar of the deceased. The cause of death is is haemorrhage due to shock as a result of antemortem injury. Rinkoo the husband of the deceased is in jail. Co-accused Anurag @ Chuhiya the cousin brother-in-law (devar) and Devendra Singh the chachia sasur of the deceased have been granted bail.

¶22

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶23

Let the applicant- Rohit , 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶24

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶25

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶26

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶27

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶28

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of

¶29

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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶30

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶31

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶32

The bail application is allowed .

¶33

Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶34

Order Date :- 21.3.2025 AS Rathore

¶35

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶36

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit 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

Shamsher vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Yaseen vs State of U.P.

Narendra Bhartiya vs State of U.P.

Vikas vs State of U.P.

Raju Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Veeru Gupta vs State of U.P.