Allowed

Mohit v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC4 Aug 2021BA1/248/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed bail application of accused Mohit in matrimonial case involving death of a wife by suicide. Court granted bail directing personal bond and sureties without final determination on case merits, noting pending trial due to COVID and sufficient jail time served.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on personal bond and two sureties in like amount. Pending application disposed of.

SL. No	Date	Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures	COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
			BA1 No. 248 of 2021 Hon’ble R.C. Kh u lbe, J. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Brief Holder for the State. Ms. Neetu Singh, learned counsel for the complainant. Heard. Accused-Mohit, who is in judicial custody in connection with case crime no. 501 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B and 316 IPC and under Section 3/ 4 of the D.P. Act registered at P.S. Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar has sought his release on bail. It is argued by the learned counsel that the accused has falsely been implicated; he is languishing in jail since 30.10.2020; as per the post mortem report, cause of death is poisoning; deceased had illicit relations with one Monu; she always used to talk with Monu and when this fact came into the knowledge of the present accused, the deceased took poison and submitted her life to the almighty. Per contra, learned State Counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed for bail. Admittedly, the deceased took this harsh step within seven years of her marriage; there is no dying declaration; as per the post mortem report, cause of death is shock and asphyxia as a suspected poisoning; no internal and external injuries were found on the body of the deceased; there were call details,

SL.
No

Date

Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
directions and
Registrar’s order
with Signatures

COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS

BA1 No. 248 of 2021
Hon’ble R.C. Kh u lbe, J.
Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel
for the applicant.
Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Brief
Holder for the State.
Ms. Neetu Singh, learned counsel
for the complainant.
Heard.
Accused-Mohit,
who is in judicial
custody in connection with case crime
no. 501 of 2020, under Sections 498A,
304B and 316 IPC and under Section 3/ 4
of
the
D.P.
Act
registered
at
P.S.
Bhagwanpur,
District
Haridwar
has
sought his release on bail.
It is argued by the learned counsel
that
the
accused
has
falsely
been
implicated; he is languishing in jail since
30.10.2020; as per the post mortem
report, cause of death is poisoning;
deceased had illicit relations with one
Monu; she always used to talk with Monu
and
when
this
fact
came
into
the
knowledge of the present accused, the
deceased took poison and submitted her
life to the almighty.
Per contra, learned State Counsel as
well
as
learned
counsel
for
the
complainant opposed for bail.
Admittedly, the deceased took this
harsh step within
seven years of her
marriage; there is no dying declaration;
as per the post mortem report, cause of
death
is
shock
and
asphyxia
as
a
suspected poisoning; no internal and
external injuries were found on the body
of the deceased; there were call details,

more than 1000 times, of the deceased
with Monu while he was not the relative of the deceased; it will take time to
conclude the trial due to covid-19 pandemic; accused has already served more than ten months; accordingly without making any comment to the final merit of the case, it is a fit case for bail at this stage. The bail application is allowed and the accused is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
( R.C. Kh u lbe, J.) 0 4 .0 8 .2 0 2 1 Parul

more than 1000 times, of the deceased

with Monu while he was not the relative
of the deceased; it will take time to

conclude
the
trial
due
to
covid-19
pandemic; accused has already served
more
than
ten
months;
accordingly
without making any comment to the final
merit of the case, it is a fit case for bail
at this stage.
The bail application is allowed and
the accused is directed to be released on
bail on his executing a personal bond and
furnishing two reliable sureties in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned.
Pending application, if any, also
stands disposed of.

( R.C. Kh u lbe, J.)
0 4 .0 8 .2 0 2 1
Parul

Mohit v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hoshiyar Singh Sajwan Vs State of Uttarakhand

Rishab Lodh Vs State of Uttarakhand

Shivam Gupta Vs State of Uttarakhand

Viabhav Nehra Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohd Vakil Vs State of Uttarakhand

Choti Vs State of Uttarkahnad