Allahabad High Court
Lorik Yadav And Another vs State Of U.P. on 14 June, 2021
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 77
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1988 of 2021
Appellant :- Lorik Yadav And Another
Respondent :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Ram Kesh,Saroj Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Order on Bail Application
Appeal was admitted vide order dated 20.05.2021.
Notices were issued on bail application, however despite the same no counter affidavit opposing the bail application is on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicants-appellants in Sessions Trial No. 78 of 2014 (State Vs. Lorik Yadav and another) in Case Crime No. 411 of 2013, under Sections 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, police station Khuthan, District Jaunpur with the prayer to enlarge the applicants-appellants on bail.
I have perused the judgment and order dated 5.4.2021 passed by the trial court convicting the applicant-appellant.
Counsel for the appellant-applicant argues that the bail application should be allowed for the sole reason that the mother-in-law and father-in-law during the course of the trial were on bail and have not deceived the said liberty. He has further drawn my attention to the post mortem report as well as the statement of the doctor in whose opinion the death occurred on account of hanging. With regard to the allegation of demand of dowry, the counsel for the applicants-appellants argues that there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the appellants-applicants demanded dowry in fact the incentive given by the government for girl child marriage was credited to her account which she had spent. He further argues that even in terms of the provision of Section 304B IPC the appellants-applicants have discharged their burden.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.
Considering the fact that the appellants-applicants were on bail during the trial and have not misused the liberty and considering the inconsistencies in the judgment and the fact that there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in the near future, I find that the appellants-applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. The appellants-applicants were in custody since 05.04.2021.
Let appellants-applicants Lorik Yadav and Tara Devi convicted and sentenced vide impugned order dated 5.4.2021 in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to deposit of entire amount of fine as imposed by the court below vide impugned order.
As soon as personal bonds and surety bonds are furnished, photocopies of the same are directed to be transmitted to this Court forthwith by trial Judge concerned to be kept on the record of this appeal.
Order Date :- 14.6.2021
piyush
