Allahabad High Court

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Vinod Kumar Dwivedi alias Vinod Dubey seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.373 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar.

3. The death of the deceased Radha occurred in her matrimonial house and an F.I.R. was lodged containing the facts that the marriage between Mukesh Dubey, the husband of the deceased Radha was solemnized 15 years back and the death of the deceased was caused by her husband hatching conspiracy with other family members as he was having some illicit relations with one another lady. The deceased was subjected to cruelty and torture for the last three years.

4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above- mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Investigation is going on in the matter. It is further submitted that the applicant had actually no role in the commission of the crime nor he had any motive in the commission of murder of the deceased. He is the father-in-law of the deceased who is living separately. Due to some strained relations, the present applicant was not on speaking terms with the family of husband of the deceased. The applicant is 2 NABAIL No. 10128 of 2025 completely ignorant about the strained relations between Mukesh, the husband and wife Radha, the deceased and he had absolutely no role to play in the married life of both of them. It is further submitted that co-accused Anita Dwivedi @ Anita Dubey, who is the jethani of the deceased has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9548 of 2025 by order dated 19.11.2025. Similarly, the co-accused Anoop Kumar Dwivedi alias Anoop Dubey, who is the jeth of the deceased has also been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9669 of 2025 vide order dated 28.11.2025. It is further submitted that no custodial interrogation is required in this matter from the applicant. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

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

6. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

7. In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond 3 NABAIL No. 10128 of 2025 or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

8. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till filing of police report under Section 193 (3) BNSS before the competent Court.

9. The application is allowed accordingly.

10. In the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till filing of police report under Section 193 (3) BNSS on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

11. In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim protection granted to the applicant. December 10, 2025 (Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant - Vinod Kumar Dwivedi alias Vinod Dubey seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.373 of 2025 under Sections 103(1), 115(2), 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar.

3. The death of the deceased Radha occurred in her matrimonial house and an F.I.R. was lodged containing the facts that the marriage between Mukesh Dubey, the husband of the deceased Radha was solemnized 15 years back and the death of the deceased was caused by her husband hatching conspiracy with other family members as he was having some illicit relations with one another lady. The deceased was subjected to cruelty and torture for the last three years.

4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has apprehension of arrest in the above- mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Allegations levelled against the applicant are false. Investigation is going on in the matter. It is further submitted that the applicant had actually no role in the commission of the crime nor he had any motive in the commission of murder of the deceased. He is the father-in-law of the deceased who is living separately. Due to some strained relations, the present applicant was not on speaking terms with the family of husband of the deceased. The applicant is 2 NABAIL No. 10128 of 2025 completely ignorant about the strained relations between Mukesh, the husband and wife Radha, the deceased and he had absolutely no role to play in the married life of both of them. It is further submitted that co-accused Anita Dwivedi @ Anita Dubey, who is the jethani of the deceased has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9548 of 2025 by order dated 19.11.2025. Similarly, the co-accused Anoop Kumar Dwivedi alias Anoop Dubey, who is the jeth of the deceased has also been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9669 of 2025 vide order dated 28.11.2025. It is further submitted that no custodial interrogation is required in this matter from the applicant. In case applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

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

6. In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, llikelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

7. In Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 1 Supreme Court Cases 676, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond 3 NABAIL No. 10128 of 2025 or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation, then there is no compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.

8. Considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion of the merits of the case, in my view, it is a fit case for anticipatory bail to the applicant till filing of police report under Section 193 (3) BNSS before the competent Court.

9. The application is allowed accordingly.

10. In the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till filing of police report under Section 193 (3) BNSS on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

11. In case of default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim protection granted to the applicant. December 10, 2025 (Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)