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

Imran vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27967 of 2018 Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramanuj Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Counter affidavit by learned AGA is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Submission is that the applicant is the husband of the deceased, Parveen. It has been submitted in the statements of the independent witnesses it has come that the informant had taken Rs.5 lakhs from the applicant to purchase a plot in the name of the deceased. He took the amount but did not purchased any plot in the name of the deceased. There is no allegation of demand of dowry or any harassment to deceased, Praveen by the applicant or her matrimonial family members. It has been submitted that the deceased committed suicide on account of shame since her father did not purchased the plot after taking amount from her husband. The applicant is in jail since 21.11.2017 and has no criminal history to his credit.
On the other hand learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 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 the applicant Imran involved in Case Crime No.594 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323 I.P.C and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sasani Gate, District- Aligarh 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
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 they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are 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 them 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 complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Order Date :- 26.8.2019 SS
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

Imran vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 August, 2019
Judges
  • Siddharth
Advocates
  • Ramanuj Tripathi