Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Krishna Pratap Singh v. State Of U.P. - CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 63 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 327 (5 January 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 19

Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 63 of 2006

Krishna Pratap Singh.....Vs.....State of U.P.


Hon'ble Alok Kumar Singh, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and also the learned A.G.A.

The applicant is involved in case crime No. 56 of 2005, for the offences under Sections 498-A, 304-B, IPC and ¾ Dowry Prohibition  Act, Police Station Pahadi, District Chitrakoot.

It is alleged that the marriage was solemnized in the year 1999, where after additional demand of dowry for Rs.50,000/- was made and when the demand could not be fulfilled the lady was set on fire on 11.6.2005 about 8 p.m. by her husband (applicant). From the husband side the information was given to the police station concerned on the next day at 5.15 a.m. to the effect that his wife was not keeping mental equilibrium and hence committed suicide by sprinkling kerosene oil on her and set herself on fire. In the post mortem only burn injury was found. No ante mortem injury was found on her body. The cause of death was due to asphyxia and shock as a result of ante mortem burn injury.

As against the genuineness of the prosecution case, proposed supporting evidence and involvement of the accused it was emphasized that after an inordinate delay of about 3 months a report was lodged on 25.9.2005 under some pressure. As per statement of the complainant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Annexure-6) although he and his family member received information about the death of his daughter but he did not go either to the police station or to any other place for about 7 days. For the first time he claims to have gone to the police station concerned 0n 7th day but his report was not written. It was argued that the complainant infact wanted to extract money from the applicant but when he could not succeed, he sent an ante dated complaint purported to be of 29.6.2005, but actually sent in the month of September, addressed to DIG Range. Consequent upon the FIR in question was registered on 25.9.2005. To show bonafide conduct of the applicant the attraction of the Court was drawn towards G.D. dated 12.6.2005 (Annexure-2) which shows that the husband himself informed in the early morning at 5.15 a.m. that his wife committed suicide by setting her on fire due to loss of mental equilibrium. It was also argued that the marriage is infact more than 7 years old. In support of this contention an emphasis was laid on Annexure 8 which is a school leaving certificate of her eldest daughter, wherein the date of birth is mentioned as 12.5.98 which suggests that the marriage had taken place seven years before, that is in 1997. In that case this case comes out of the ambit of Section 304 IPC.

The bail was, however, opposed by the learned A.G.A.

The points pertaining to nature of accusation, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses, prima facie satisfaction of the Court regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered.  

 In view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, taking into consideration some of the arguments advanced on behalf of the applicant in respect of the points discussed herein, particularly in respect of inordinate delay in lodging of the FIR, the factum of giving information about the incident to the police station concerned which is situated at a distance of about 13-14 kilometers by the husband himself on the very next day in the early morning and absence of any other ante mortem injury on the body of the victim, without prejudice to the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Let the applicant be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.