The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail for the case registered under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C., and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
A single judge bench of Justice Krishan Pahal made a notable observation that the provision of anticipatory bail was inserted to save litigants from false prosecution and it cannot permit the prosecution to be converted into an area to settle a score.
Brief Facts:
The applicant had filed the anticipatory bail application in Case Crime No.310 of 2022, registered under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant and other members of the family are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for the demand of Rs.60 lakhs and a car as dowry. The marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant as per Hindu rites on 13.12.2021.
In the intervening period in the month of September, 2022, the deceased is stated to have undergone the abortion of the fetus she was carrying in her womb. On Deepawali i.e. 18.10.2022, the applicant is stated to have taken the daughter of the informant to his house. The applicant and other family members are stated to have beaten the daughter of the informant as such the informant had taken her to his house on 21.10.2022. The condition of the daughter of the informant deteriorated as a result of the injuries sustained.
Contentions of the Applicant:
Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued at the outset that this is a clear misuse of dowry laws as no case is made out against the applicant. There is not a whisper of complaint against the applicant or other family members before the institution of the present FIR. He had also placed much reliance on the inquest report of the deceased person which indicates that there was no visible injury on the body of the deceased person.
Contentions of the Respondent:
Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the statement of the informant recorded by the Investigating Officer categorically indicates that the fetus had expired in her womb and she was not subjected to treatment by the applicant and his family members as the said fetus remained dead for a period of ten days in her womb. The said negligent act speaks volumes of the applicant having subjected the deceased person to cruelty.
Observations of the Court:
The Court after hearing the rival contentions and going through the record observed that considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant there was no complaint against the applicant or his family members before the death of the deceased person and also that no visible injury has been observed on the body of the deceased person internally or externally. Therefore, in view of the court, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1."
In respect to Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Court observed that it was inserted into the Code as it was seen that the influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them by detaining them in jail for some time. The prosecution cannot be permitted to be converted into an arena to settle scores.
The decision of the Court:
The Allahabad High Court granted anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial on furnishing a personal and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court.
Case Title: Udit Arya vs State of UP
Coram: Justice Krishan Pahal
Case No.: CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4560 of 2023
Advocate for the Applicant: Jitendra Prasad,Satya Prakash Rai
Advocate for the Respondent: G.A.,Anil Mullick
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
