Allahabad High Court
Raj Kumar Srivastava vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 October, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:192031
Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11001 of 2023
Applicant :- Raj Kumar Srivastava
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rashtrapati Khare,Gaurav Khare
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Rashtrapati Khare, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajeet Kumar Chaudhary, Advocate holding brief of Sri Virendra Jaiswal, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.193 of 2023, registered under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act at Police Station- Subhashnagar, District Bareilly with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the son of the applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant as per Hindu Rites on 30.11.2020. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry thereby leading to her death on 03.06.2023 around 9:30 p.m.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is an old aged man and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is the father-in-law and lives separately to the deceased and her husband and at the time of occurrence, she was not present at the scene. Learned counsel has further stated that the allegations levelled in the FIR are per se false as the cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The present FIR is misuse of dowry laws. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that he has co-operated in the investigation and is ready to do so in trial also failing which the State can move appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that there are independent witnesses of the vicinity who have stated that the applicant used to live very much in the same house and there are no documents appended regarding the alibi of the applicant. Learned counsel has further stated that the deceased person has expired within a span of three years of her marriage.
7. Learned A.G.A. has also vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application but could not dispute the fact that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging.
8. On due consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicants, the applicants are liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicants shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the accused-applicants-Raj Kumar Srivastava be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i). that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(ii). that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
(iii). that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;
(iv). that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
(v). that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
(vi). that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
(vii). that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail.
10. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and shall not affect the trial.
Order Date :- 5.10.2023
Ravi Kant
(Krishan Pahal, J.)
