Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Anish vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 October, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40845 of 2018 Applicant :- Anish Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Raj Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Ram Raj Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. General allegation of demand of additional dowry has been made against the applicant and his other family members. He next submitted that the applicant was not present on the spot at the time of incident. He further submitted that although the victim had committed suicide but the prosecution has tried to give it a colour of dowry death. He laslty submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 4.7.2017 has no other criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant Anish be released on bail in Case Crime No. 185 of 2017, under Section 120B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Doghat, district-Baghpat on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
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.
Order Date :- 26.10.2018 Faridul
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

Anish vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 October, 2018
Judges
  • Vivek Kumar Singh
Advocates
  • Ram Raj Pandey