Court No. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 16642 of 2021 Applicant :- Yashpal Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar Mishra,Radhey Shyam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicants- Yashpal Singh, Smt. Pareva, Neeraj and Pooja seeking bail in Case Crime No. 498 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail.
It is argued that on 06.10.2020, the husband of the deceased has expired in an accident. The first information report for the same was lodged on 09.10.2020. It is further argued that on 12.10.2020, the wife of the aforesaid deceased also consumed poison and after her death, the father-in-law (applicant no. 1) himself reported the matter to the police station, on the basis of which the inquest was done on 13.10.2020. On 15.10.2020, the father of the deceased got the present first information report lodged on the basis of allegations of dowry demand and claim the money of insurance. It is further argued that applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. The applicants have imminent apprehension of arrest in this case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. It is further argued that in case the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey the conditions of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail and submits that there is an allegation of demand of motorcycle and rupees one lakh as additional dowry. When the demand was not fulfilled, the deceased with her eight months old daughter was thrown out of her matrimonial house. Regarding the aforesaid allegation, the deceased has also sent a registered letter on 09.09.2020 to the concerned S.S.P and when the husband of the deceased expired on 06.10.2020 then only he (father of the deceased) along with his daughter and grand daughter reached at the matrimonial house of the deceased and left the deceased and her daughter there. It is further argued that in his presence also, the accused persons used to abuse her and also used to beat her. The allegations made hereinabove are fully corroborated by the evidence of the complainant and his wife, which are on record. It is further argued that the cause of death could not be ascertained by the post-mortem report, hence, the viscera was preserved and from that FSL Report, it is revealed that the death of the deceased was caused due to aluminium phosphide poison. Hence, the prayer for rejection of the anticipatory bail is made.
Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, taking into consideration the gravity of the accusation as well as the fact that there being no possibility of fleeing from justice, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicants Neeraj and Pooja are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case as they are aged about 20 and 18 years and also said to be students.
The anticipatory bail application on behalf of the Neeraj and Pooja is allowed.
In the event of arrest of the applicants- Neeraj and Pooja involved in Case Crime No. 498 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) the applicants shall make him available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii) the applicants 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) the applicants would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.
In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.
Insofar as the anticipatory bail with regard to applicants Yashpal Singh and Smt. Pareva is concerned, the same is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Saurabh