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

Gangadeen vs State Of U P

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

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 50
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4062 of 2019 Applicant :- Gangadeen Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Radhey Shyam Shukla,Vipul Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
This case has been assigned by the Hon'ble The Chief Justice vide order dated 29.1.2019.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged against Amit Kumar (husband), Gangadeen(father-in-law), Omveer(jeth), wife of Omveer( Jethani) and Deepu(Jeth) alleging that Neetu was married to Amit Kumar on 11.5.2017 but for non- fulfilment of Rs.1,00,000/-, motorcycle, golden chain and one coloured TV as demand in dowry, they killed her. According to postmortem report, cause of death was found strangulation.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is father-in-law and languishing in jail since 15.10.2018(more than three and half months) having no criminal history. He has been falsely implicated. Co-accused Kamlesha has already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.1.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2657 of 2019 (Bail order produced during argument, is taken on record). General role is alleged to have been assigned to all the accused. He is not beneficiary of so- called demand of dowry. There is no independent witness. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He admitted that the applicant has no criminal history.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation, period of custody, gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Gangadeen involved in Case Crime No.261 of 2018, under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kalan, District Shahjahanpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 29.1.2019 P.P.
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

Gangadeen vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 January, 2019
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Radhey Shyam Shukla Vipul Shukla