Tag Archives: bail granted

Grant me bail as I’m MLA! What about normal citizen accused of #false498a #falseRape ?

A court @ Delhi, granted bail to Aam Aadmi Party’s Delhi legislator Dinesh Mohaniya, on Wednesday , June 29 2016,

Dinesh Mohaniya was arrested on the charge of “sexual harassment”

In his bail plea, Mohaniya said he is a sitting legislator and would not flee from justice !!!!

He also said that he has been falsely implicated.

Screenshot - 30_06_2016 , 14_17_10.png

11 months Jail for a FALSE rape case AFTER girl eloped. Falsity apparent says Allahabad HC & grants bail

  • Girl seems to have voluntarily eloped with the boy
  • however, claiming that the girl is only 16 years old a rape case is filed and the boy incarcerated since 08. July 2015 !! (approx 11 months)
  • Court notices and states the following “…. allegation of rape against the applicant but the same has not been corroborated by any medical evidence and surrounding circumstances is totally belies the prosecution case as well as statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Her medical report does not show any mark of injury, violence or sexual assault. He further submits that it is not a case of taking away or enticing away the prosecutrix as from a perusal of her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it is apparent that she has voluntarily eloped with the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 8.7.2015. The falsity of the case is apparent from the fact that the Nana and Baba of the applicant have also been implicated in the present case….”

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

Court No. – 4

Case :- BAIL No. – 4796 of 2016

Applicant :- Vimlesh Katheriya

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Jairam Bharti
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

Hon’ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

Heard Sri Jairam Bharti, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Sushma Shukla, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per medical opinion, prosecutrix is 16 years. The law is settled that the margin of error in ascertaining the age by radiological examination is two years on either side and hence the possibility of the prosecutrix being major cannot be ruled out. Although, she has made an allegation of rape against the applicant but the same has not been corroborated by any medical evidence and surrounding circumstances is totally belies the prosecution case as well as statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Her medical report does not show any mark of injury, violence or sexual assault. He further submits that it is not a case of taking away or enticing away the prosecutrix as from a perusal of her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it is apparent that she has voluntarily eloped with the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 8.7.2015. The falsity of the case is apparent from the fact that the Nana and Baba of the applicant have also been implicated in the present case.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

Let the applicant Vimlesh Katheriya involved in Case Crime No. 587 of 2015 under sections 323, 342, 363, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, police station Mishrikh, District Sitapur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 14.6.2016

shiraz

Visit http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/StartWebSearch.do for more Judgments/Orders delivered at Allahabad High Court and Its Bench at Lucknow.


—————————-disclaimer———————————-

This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites (this one is from Allahabad HC website). Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.

Patna HC : 15 Lakhs for a bail! How 498A bail proceedings go for mediation & end in alimony payment!

  • Husband files matrimonial suit on 14.05.2013 for dissolution of marriage
  • Wife appears on 18.02.2014 and thereafter a complaint is filed on 11.03.2014 !!, for offenses punishable u/s 498A of IPC
  • Husband apprehending arrest in this 498a case seeks bail.
  • He is granted bail on the condition of payment of Rs. 15 Lakhs as alimony !
  • This is JUST at the time of bail, meaning obviously the 498a case has NOT proceeded to evidence, inquiry or trial!.
  • Also, If you wonder as to how alimony is a pre condition for a bail, how alimony is decided in a criminal case, let me tell you that makes it two of us wondering on the state of marriages in India!
  • However numerous cases are coming to fore where mere bail applications are converted to alimony payments and / or settlement negotiations.
  • Obviously, this happens before the dowry case is decided on merits, though alimony is to be decided by a civil court on different parameters, and criminal courts handling bail are NOT expected to decide alimony !!
  • Under the fear of arrest, under fear of loosing their jobs, men are forced to pay thru their nose !!

 


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.51240 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -643 Year- 2014 Thana -MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District-MUZAFFARPUR


  • Dr. Mukesh Kumar S/o Yadunandan Prasad R/o Mohalla Friends Colony,
    Road No. 3, P.S. Rajiv Nagar, District Patna …. …. Petitioner/s

Versus

  • 1. The State of Bihar
  • 2. Priyadarshini Wife of Dr Mukesh Kumar, D/o Sri Umesh Kumar R/o
    Mohalla Bahal Khana Road, Chhoti Kalyani, P.S.Town, P.O. Ramna,
    District Muzaffarpur at present Amudh Vinayak medical College, 1st
    year P.G. Dept of Radiology Cuddalore, Main Road, Edumbakka,
    Pudduchery 607402 … …. Opposite Party/s

Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rudal Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. P.K.Choursiya(App)


CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH

ORAL ORDER

05/ 26-06-2015

Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner being the husband of the complainant is apprehending his arrest in a complaint case wherein processes have been directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

The basic accusation is of torture.

The marriage between the petitioner and the complainant being performed on 18.04.2012 having no issue is admitted fact. Petitioner and the complainant are present.

The petitioner filed Matrimonial Suit No. 382 of 2013 on 14.05.2013 for dissolution of the marriage in which complainant appeared 18.02.2014 and thereafter the present complaint has been filed on 11.03.2014. The conciliation also not appear to be feasible at present. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

Both the petitioner and the complainant agree to part ways on payment of permanent alimony of Rs.15,00,000/- (Fifteen lakhs) within a period of one year. The offer of the petitioner to make such payment is acceptable to the complainant who is present in the Court.

Considering the present stand of the parties, let the above named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of twelve weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Complaint Case No. 643 of 2014, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

The bail of the petitioner will be accepted on deposit of Rs.3,00,000/- (Three lakhs) at the time of executing of bail bond and the rest amount of Rs.12,00,000/- (Twelve lakhs) in three-four monthly installments of four lakhs each. The same will be deposited before the learned court below through bank draft. The first installment of three lakhs will be released in favour of the complainant on filing an application in Matrimonial Suit No. 382 of 2013 by both the parties under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act. It is expected from learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna to dispose of the Matrimonial Suit No. 382 of 2013 expeditiously.

The complainant will also file an appropriate application in Complaint Case No. 643 of 2014 before the learned court below to the effect that the issue has been reconciled between the parties and it is expected from learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur to dispose of Complaint Case No. 643 of 2014 expeditiously.

The last three installments shall be deposited by the petitioner through bank draft before the learned court below within the time frame stipulated above which will be released to the complainant within one week of passing of the decree in matrimonial suit. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) DKS/-

U T

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.

CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting
*******************************************************************************

 

Unrelated villagers roped into 498a. Lower court NOT vigilant, Patna HC orders bail, decries misuse !

Misuse of 498a has become SO very rampant that completely un-related people are roped into 498a and they have to run up to the HC to get bail !!

In this case, quoting the Hon HC “…None can be allowed to misuse the privilege under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as a weapon which is to defend a helpless lady. It appears that court’s are not vigilant to prevent this abuse by way of taking cognizance for false prosecution. Petitioners are villagers not relatives of the husband…”

*************** case from public websites ****************

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                         Cr.Misc. No.4083 of 2010

1. BHIKHARI SINGH son of late Methur Singh
2. Shivendra Jha, son of Dinanath Jha
Both are residents of vill.-Chhourahiya, P.S.-Sahiyara, Distt.-Sitamarhi——-Petitioners.
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
***********

2. 3.3.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

None can be allowed to misuse the privilege under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act as a weapon which is to defend a helpless lady. It appears that court’s are not vigilant to prevent this abuse by way of taking cognizance for false prosecution. Petitioners are villagers not relatives of the husband.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order the above named petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi , in connection with Sahiyara P.S. case no.80 of 2009 , subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. http://evinayak.tumblr.com https://vinayak.wordpress.com http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

( Mandhata Singh, J. )

Sudip

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

Mother of 20yr old son & 2 married daughtrs files 498A. Patna HC says ‘example of MISUSE’. Bail granted ! Extent of Misuse if un imaginable

Misuse of 498a is Rampant all over India. Trivial incidents are turned into criminal cases. Here is a woman with a 20 year old son and 2 married daughters who has a petty quarrel with her husband (husband asked money from Son !! ) and goes and files a 498a case !! The Husband is running for a bail ! Imagine the amount of lawyer’s fee that would be wasted the time wasted and the agony of going thru the process. Imagine the amount taxpayer money that is wasted on such false and frivolous cases. It’s equally sad that such women are NOT given strict punishment for wasting their lives and lives of others

******

Excerpts

“…Rs. 10,000/- was demanded by the petitioner from informant’s son that was opposed by the informant which resulted in an incident of assault ..” !!
“…No case under Section 498A is made out even after accepting the allegation …”
“…This case is an example that how the provision under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is misused….”

*************** CASE from public sources **********************

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                        Cr.Misc. No.25340 of 2010
                            BIPAT MISTRY
                                  Versus
                           STATE OF BIHAR
***********

2.

12.08.2010

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

No case under Section 498A is made out even after accepting the allegation that informant son is 20 years old, two daughters are married and Rs. 10,000/- was demanded by the petitioner from informant’s son that was opposed by the informant which resulted in an incident of assault took place and she received injury but not grievous in nature.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed.

In the event of arrest or surrender within one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in connection with Ekangar Sarai P.S. Case No. 42 of 2010 above named, petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M. Hilsa, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

This case is an example that how the provision under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is misused.

( Mandhata Singh, J.)

Anand Kr.

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************