Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Awasthi vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 22 May, 2024
Author: Pankaj Bhatia
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39004
Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1057 of 2024
Applicant :- Rajesh Awasthi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. /Prin.Secy. Home Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Wali Nawaz Khan,Nadeem Murtaza
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Ran Vijay Singh, learned AGA for the State and Sri Virendra Misra for the informant and perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in FIR No.0164 of 2024, under Section 306 IPC and section 3 and 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Haidergarh, District Barabanki.
3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was to be wedded to the nephew of the applicant namely Shubham Awasthi and the pre-marriage ceremony had already been done and substantial arrangements were made for the wedding which was planned for November 2024. It was also stated that an amount of Rs.15.00 lacs was decided to be paid at the time of marriage, however, the family of the applicant started demanding a four wheeler. Subsequently, in pre-wedding ceremony on 24.02.2024, on account of the dispute pertaining to demand of dowry, the daughter of the informant committed suicide and left a suicide note, which is reflected in the bail cancellation order to the effect that on account of breaking of marriage, all the persons who were present were responsible for her death.
4. In the light of the said, it is argued by the counsel for the applicant that even as per the FIR and the material collected, prima-facie the deceased committed suicide on account of humiliation of the marriage being broken. He argues that the said allegations, even if believe to be gospel truth for the sake of argument, would not constitute an offence under section 306 IPC as there is no abetment as defined under section 107 IPC. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Mariano Anto Bruno and another vs. Inspector of Police; 2022 SCC Online SC 1387.
5. Learned AGA as well as the counsel for the informant oppose the anticipatory bail application by arguing that the circumstances including the demand of dowry of a four wheeler was the real cause, of the victim committing suicide, as such, no sympathy can be shown to the applicant.
6. Considering the submissions made at the bar, prima-facie from the FIR and the materials collected including the case diary, there is no material to suggest abetment in the light of the definition of abetment as contained in Section 107 IPC as such, considering the law as propounded in the case of Mariano Anto Bruno (supra), a case for anticipatory bail is made out.
7. The present application for anticipatory bail is accordingly allowed.
8. In the event of arrest, let the applicant Rajesh Awasthi be released on anticipatory bail till filing of the charge-sheet in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.30,000/- to the satisfaction of Station House Officer concerned with the following conditions:
(a) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required and will co-operate with the investigation;
(b) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court;
(c) The applicant 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
Order Date :- 22.5.2024
VNP/-
