Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Hoti Lal Vs. State

Hoti Lal vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Oct 12, 1992
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/693808

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Miscellaneous (Main) Appeal No. 2425 of 1992
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

The case questioned whether the bail could be granted to the accused under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, where it was found that his wife had died at the time when she was at her parents place - In such circumstances, the Court could grant the bail to the accused - - 5,000.00 with a personal bond i...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 439

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hoti Lal

Advocate P.P. Grover and; Hirdayjot Singh, Advs

Respondent

State

Legal References

Reported In
50(1993)DLT43

Excerpt

the case questioned whether the bail could be granted to the accused under section 304-b of the indian penal code, 1860, where it was found that his wife had died at the time when she was at her parents place - in such circumstances, the court could grant the bail to the accused - - 5,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.mohd. samim, j.(1) this is an application by the petitioner for releasing him on bail. learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. the deceased smt. vandana had been residing with her parents for the last six months before her death i.e. on 21/05/1992.in any case, according to the statement of her mother smt. bhagwati,the deceased had been residing with her parents for the last three months.a compromise was entered into in between the deceased and the petitioner on 1/05/1992. as per terms of the compromise the deceased was tore-join the petitioner on 23/05/1992. in the above circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the instant case doesn't fall within the domain of section 304-b of the indian penal code and the petitioner is entitled to bail. he cannot be held responsible for the suicide committed by the deceased on 21/05/1992. hence the petitioner is entitled to an order of bail.(2) learned public prosecutor mr. hirdyajot singh has oppose] theapplication. according to him the deceased was treated with cruelty and there was a demand of, dowry as per the statement of the mother of the deceased smt. bhagwati.(3) considering the above facts and circumstances, i think present case is a fit case for bail. let the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a surety in the sum of rs. 5,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Full Judgment

Mohd. Samim, J.

(1) This is an application by the petitioner for releasing him on bail. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The deceased Smt. Vandana had been residing with her parents for the last six months before her death i.e. on 21/05/1992.In any case, according to the statement of her mother Smt. Bhagwati,the deceased had been residing with her parents for the last three months.A compromise was entered into in between the deceased and the petitioner on 1/05/1992. As per terms of the compromise the deceased was tore-join the petitioner on 23/05/1992. In the above circumstances, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the instant case doesn't fall within the domain of Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioner is entitled to bail. He cannot be held responsible for the suicide committed by the deceased on 21/05/1992. Hence the petitioner is entitled to an order of bail.

(2) Learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Hirdyajot Singh has oppose] theapplication. According to him the deceased was treated with cruelty and there was a demand of, dowry as per the statement of the mother of the deceased Smt. Bhagwati.

(3) Considering the above facts and circumstances, I think present case is a fit case for bail. Let the petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing a surety in the sum of Rs. 5,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial