first_imgNews Updates”Applicant In Jail Can’t Be Left At The Mercy Of State”: Allahabad High Court Expresses Displeasure At Non-Filing Of /Reports In Time Sparsh Upadhyay21 March 2021 11:00 PMShare This – xThe Court is not getting sufficient cooperation from the side of the State. This is a pathetic state and the Court records its strongest exception of such type of attitude from the State: Allahabad High CourtThe Allahabad High Court recently rebuked the Uttar Pradesh Government while noting that despite getting sufficient time, almost in every case, the AGA failed to provide counter-affidavit and viscera report of the deceased in time. The Bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi sternly remarked, “The Court is not getting sufficient cooperation from the side of the State. This is a pathetic…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Allahabad High Court recently rebuked the Uttar Pradesh Government while noting that despite getting sufficient time, almost in every case, the AGA failed to provide counter-affidavit and viscera report of the deceased in time. The Bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi sternly remarked, “The Court is not getting sufficient cooperation from the side of the State. This is a pathetic state and the Court records its strongest exception of such type of attitude from the State.” Further, the Court noted that in almost every case, despite being granted sufficient time, the AGA cut sorry figure either by not filing the counter affidavit or viscera report within time. To this, the Court remarked, “The applicant who is in jail, cannot be left at the mercy of the State/or the prosecutor”, the Court further remarked. Lastly, left with no other option, the court went ahead to decide the bail application with the help of counsel for the applicant only. The matter before the Court and its order The applicant, Anmol Rastogi filed a Bail Application in case crime no.182 of 2020, under Sections 323, 328, 304-B, 498A and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Ganj, District-Rampur. The applicant had been languishing in jail since 26th May 2020. Within three years of marriage on account of additional dowry, the applicant’s wife died and it was alleged that she was administered some poisonous substance by which she lost her life. The applicant’s counsel drew Court’s attention to the doctor’s opinion which said that the deceased suffered from a serious infection in her body and thereafter she was referred to a higher center for better treatment. It was contended that the doctor did not give any candid reply to the fact that whether she was administered any poisonous substance or not? On the other hand, A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. Lastly, taking into account the fact that the witnesses turned hostile, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of counsel for the parties, the Court observed that the applicant had made out a case for bail. Thus, the applicant-Anmol Rastogi was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court. Case title – Anmol Rastogi v. State of U.P. [Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. – 35443 of 2020] Click Here To Download OrderRead OrderSubscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Storylast_img read more