Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Anand Rai vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52976 of 2019 Applicant :- Anand Rai Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is husband of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in this case. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. The applicant has not harassed or tortured the deceased. In the postmortem report, the cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained, therefore, viscera was preserved. In viscera report aluminium phosphate poison has been found to the deceased. The deceased was suffering from serious illness of Bipolar Disorder for that reason she consumed poison. The applicant and other family members made their best efforts to save her life and the deceased was admitted in district hospital where she died during treatment. During trial the statement of Gangasagar, father of the deceased and Geeta Devi, mother of the deceased, Nath Sharma (Nai) Awadhesh Bihari (pandit) and Rajesh Kumar Rai (uncle of the deceased) have been recorded as P.Ws. 1 to 6. The P.W.-1 Gangasagar, p.w.-2 Geeta Devi, p.w.-3 Km. Ankita have not supported the prosecution version and have been declared hostile. In their statements they have stated that there was no dispute of demand of dowry. The P.W.-4 Nath Sharma and p.w.-5 Awadhesh Bihari are formal witnesses. The P.W.-6 Rajesh Kumar Rai, uncle of the deceased, has also not supported the prosecution version in his cross examination and stated that the applicant has not demanded any dowry. There was no dispute of demand of dowry. The deceased has not made any complaint against the applicant. There is no cogent evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident and has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 5.10.2018.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.
Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Anand Rai involved in Case Crime No.35 of 2018, under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station Suhwal District Ghazipur be released on bail 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;
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and he will cooperate with the trial.
3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 Gss
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Anand Rai vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 November, 2019
Judges
  • Bachchoo Lal
Advocates
  • Shailendra Kumar Rai