Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 687 (ALL)

Anarilal v. State of U. P.

2023-03-15

RAJ BEER SINGH

body2023
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-accused in case crime No.229 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4 D.P. Act, police station Kulpahar, District Mahoba with the prayer to enlarge the applicant-accused on bail. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant-accused that the applicant-accused is father-in-law of deceased and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The marriage of deceased with son of applicant-accused has taken place in the year 2019. The allegations of dowry demand and harassment of deceased, levelled against applicant-accused, are thoroughly false and baseless. No specific role has been assigned to the applicant-accused. The first information report was lodged against the entire family members of the applicant but four named co-accused persons have been exonerated during investigation. In postmortem report, except ligature mark, no other injury has been shown on the body of deceased and cause of death has been shown asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that there is no credible evidence against applicant-accused. Lastly, it has been submitted that applicant-accused is languishing in jail since 01.09.2022 having no criminal history and that in case the applicant-accused is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. 4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail. The applicant-accused is named in the first information report. There are allegations that applicant-accused used to harass the deceased on account of dowry. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, period of custody and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. 6. Let the applicant-accused Anarilal involved in aforesaid crime 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-accused shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. 2. The applicant-accused shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. 3. 6. Let the applicant-accused Anarilal involved in aforesaid crime 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-accused shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. 2. The applicant-accused shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. 3. The applicant-accused shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. 4. The applicant-accused 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-accused 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. 7. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant-accused in accordance with law.