High Court

2. Heard Sri Mahadeo Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant although he had sought time to file supplementary affidavit annexing the certain documents of the hospital when the matter was previously taken up on 04.03.2025 but now he does not intend to file any supplementary affidavit. It is submitted that the matter be heard and decided on merits on the documents available on record.

4. This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Chandresh Kori, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 171 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at Police Station Giriwan, District Banda.

5. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 08.06.2024 by Ram Lal Kori against the applicant and Smt. Hariya with the allegation that his daughter Khusboo Kori was married with the applicant on 29.05.2023. After she was sent to her matrimonial house, the accused persons started demanding dowry and used to torture her physically and mentally and there was a demand of a motorcycle and Rs. 1 lakh in cash. Khushboo told about it to her father on phone on which he talked to the accused persons. Khushboo came with her husband to the house on 05.06.2024 and on 06.06.2024 at about 04:00 PM went back. On 06.06.2024 in the night Khushboo was murdered by the accused persons due to their demand of dowry. Information about it was given to him on 06.06.2024 at about 10:26 PM on phone informing that she is admitted in the medical college. He then along with other family members reached there and found her body in the postmortem house. He saw the injuries on the body. The accused persons have murdered his daughter for their demand of dowry.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report wherein she was found to have received single ligature mark and the cause of death was opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. It is submitted that injuries were noted as antemortem injuries but there were postmortem injuries being three in number also noted in the postmortem report and further the doctor has noted that the said injuries did not show any sign of inflammation and healing and are suspected by animal bites. It is submitted that the said injuries probably have been caused due to animal bites while the body was kept in the mortuary. It is further submitted while placing the inquest report that the applicant was a witness at the time of inquest and his name finds place at serial No. 5 at the list of witnesses in the inquest. It is further submitted that till such time there was neither any suspicion nor any allegation against the applicant regarding the manner of death but subsequently after lodging of the FIR after two days on 08.06.2024 a different colour has been given and the applicant along with his mother has been made as an accused. It is submitted that the presence of the applicant at the time of inquest clearly goes to show that there was no suspicion or allegation against him for any such offence. It is submitted after two days of the incident, the present FIR was lodged levelling false allegation and totally baseless facts. It is further submitted while placing para 21 of the affidavit that the deceased was under pressure of the informant and her mother and she wanted to marry someone else whom she loved but she was married to the applicant and was not happy and thus she committed suicide and died. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 10.06.2024.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased and he is named in the FIR and there are allegations against him.

8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he was present at the time of inquest. Till such time there was no suspicion or allegation against him. The postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted on 07.06.2024 and the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging with single ligature mark. The other injuries noted in the postmortem, are stated to be animal bites which were not the cause of death. The FIR has been lodged after two days of the incident and even after one day of postmortem examination.

9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the applicant Chandresh Kori, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)

2. Heard Sri Mahadeo Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant although he had sought time to file supplementary affidavit annexing the certain documents of the hospital when the matter was previously taken up on 04.03.2025 but now he does not intend to file any supplementary affidavit. It is submitted that the matter be heard and decided on merits on the documents available on record.

4. This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C./483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Chandresh Kori, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 171 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at Police Station Giriwan, District Banda.

5. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 08.06.2024 by Ram Lal Kori against the applicant and Smt. Hariya with the allegation that his daughter Khusboo Kori was married with the applicant on 29.05.2023. After she was sent to her matrimonial house, the accused persons started demanding dowry and used to torture her physically and mentally and there was a demand of a motorcycle and Rs. 1 lakh in cash. Khushboo told about it to her father on phone on which he talked to the accused persons. Khushboo came with her husband to the house on 05.06.2024 and on 06.06.2024 at about 04:00 PM went back. On 06.06.2024 in the night Khushboo was murdered by the accused persons due to their demand of dowry. Information about it was given to him on 06.06.2024 at about 10:26 PM on phone informing that she is admitted in the medical college. He then along with other family members reached there and found her body in the postmortem house. He saw the injuries on the body. The accused persons have murdered his daughter for their demand of dowry.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report wherein she was found to have received single ligature mark and the cause of death was opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. It is submitted that injuries were noted as antemortem injuries but there were postmortem injuries being three in number also noted in the postmortem report and further the doctor has noted that the said injuries did not show any sign of inflammation and healing and are suspected by animal bites. It is submitted that the said injuries probably have been caused due to animal bites while the body was kept in the mortuary. It is further submitted while placing the inquest report that the applicant was a witness at the time of inquest and his name finds place at serial No. 5 at the list of witnesses in the inquest. It is further submitted that till such time there was neither any suspicion nor any allegation against the applicant regarding the manner of death but subsequently after lodging of the FIR after two days on 08.06.2024 a different colour has been given and the applicant along with his mother has been made as an accused. It is submitted that the presence of the applicant at the time of inquest clearly goes to show that there was no suspicion or allegation against him for any such offence. It is submitted after two days of the incident, the present FIR was lodged levelling false allegation and totally baseless facts. It is further submitted while placing para 21 of the affidavit that the deceased was under pressure of the informant and her mother and she wanted to marry someone else whom she loved but she was married to the applicant and was not happy and thus she committed suicide and died. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 10.06.2024.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased and he is named in the FIR and there are allegations against him.

8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he was present at the time of inquest. Till such time there was no suspicion or allegation against him. The postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted on 07.06.2024 and the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging with single ligature mark. The other injuries noted in the postmortem, are stated to be animal bites which were not the cause of death. The FIR has been lodged after two days of the incident and even after one day of postmortem examination.

9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

10. Let the applicant Chandresh Kori, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.)