Nathu Lal vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42708

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9715 of 2025

Applicant :- Nathu Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Rajendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Nathu Lal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 0387 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80(2) BNS and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Aonla, District Bareilly.

¶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 father-in-law of the deceased Kavita.

¶12

(iii) The marriage of the deceased Kavita was solemnized with Sunil son of the applicant on 21.11.2022.

¶13

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

¶14

(v) The cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was preserved. No external injury seen all over the body at the time of examination.

¶15

(vi) Sunil the husband of the deceased is in jail.

¶16

(vii) The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 26 of the affidavit and is in jail since 24.11.2024.

¶17

(viii) Co-accused Jagveer, Neelam, Chandra Prakash and Meena have been exonerated by the Investigating Officer and charge sheet has submitted only against the applicant and Sunil the husband of the deceased, para 23 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court.

¶18

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there are allegations against him. It is further submits that the viscera report has been received in which aluminium phosphide poison was found in it.

¶19

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was preserved but the State submits that in the viscera report, aluminium phosphide poison was found. Sunil the husband of the deceased is in jail. Four accused out of six named accused, Jagveer, Neelam, Chandra Prakash and Meena have been exonerated by the Investigating Officer.

¶20

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.

¶21

Let the applicant Nathu Lal , 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:-

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she/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.

¶25

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner

¶26

whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her/him presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 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 her/him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023.

¶27

(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 statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 her/him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her/him under Section 269 BNS, 2023.

¶28

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

¶29

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.

¶30

The bail application is allowed .

¶31

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

¶32

Order Date :- 24.3.2025 M. ARIF

¶33

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶34

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nathu Lal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nathu Lal 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

Rohit vs State of U.P.

Raju Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Veeru Gupta vs State of U.P.

Boby @ Raja Babu vs State of U.P.

Smt. Rajabai vs State of U.P.

Srikant Singh vs State of U.P.