CourtKutchehry.com
High Courts

Bhagwan Das vs State of U.P.

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 16 July 2007 · Citation: (2007) 07 AHC CK 0139

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.D.Chaturvedi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 439 · Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Section 3, 4 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 304B, 498A
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 14546 of 2007
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 343 words

V.D. Chaturvedi, J.—Heard.

2.

The applicant is involved in offence punishable under Section 498A/304B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mauranipur District Jhansi.

3.

It is alleged that the marriage of the deceased Abhilasha was held with the applicant on 1622006. The deceased was handicapped; that after her marriage Rs. 50,000 and a Motor Cycle were demanded by the applicant and other coaccused and they have retained her ornaments; that she was subjected to cruelty for the said demand of dowry and her dowry death was committed on 2242006 by hanging her alive; that next day the complainant Ghanshyam (father of the deceased) received the information hence he alongwith his wife and other persons reached at the house of the applicant and found that Abhilasha was forcibly killed; that the accused had wrongly confined the complainant and his other companions for 2 days and meanwhile disposed of her deadbody without getting its postmortem; that due to fear the report could not be lodged earlier.

4.

The F.I.R. was lodged on 2472006 at 21.15 hours. The applicant''s Counsel contends that Smt. Abhilasha died of her natural death and that the complainant participated in the last ritual of Smt. Abhilasha; that it was due to the complainant''s greed that he lodged the F.I.R. against the applicant two months after the incident.

5.

The learned A.G.A. replied that due to fear the F.I.R. could not be lodged earlier.

6.

Considering that the complainant reached the applicant''s house next day of the incident but the F.I.R. could be lodged 2 months after the incident and that there is no postmortem report of the deceased and that the applicant is in Jail from 622007, I deem it proper that the applicant, although is a husband, he released on bail in Case Crime No. 902 of 2006 under Section 498A/304B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mauranipur District Jhansi on his executing a personal bond of Rs. 80,000 and furnishing two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.