State of Uttarakhand v. Counsel for the State

: Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. The present Bail Application has been moved by the applicant-Mithun Mandal (male), aged about 25 years (S/o Shri Nishant Mandal, R/o Kali Nagar, Dineshpur, Police Station Dineshpur, District Udham Singh Nagar) under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in connection with the FIR No. 0120 of 2022, registered at Police Station Dineshpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

2. The applicant, named above, is in judicial custody in the case arising out of FIR dated 06.08.2022, registered as Case Crime No. 0120 of 2022 for the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at police station Dineshpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2

3. Heard Mr. Bhuvnesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.

4. It is contended on behalf of the learned counsel for the applicant that the present matter relates to the dowry death. The sister of the complainant-Jyoti Vishwas got married to the present applicant on 25.04.2022. It was a love marriage and they got married in accordance with Hindu Rites and Rituals in Hari Mandir, Dineshpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

5. The allegations against the applicant are that he subjected his wife-deceased (Jyoti Vishwas) to cruelty by demanding dowry, and in particular, by asking her to get a pulsar motorcycle and also one lakh rupees. It is alleged that he also used to beat her. The deceased complained to her mother telephonically and also personally. It is also alleged that the in-laws of the applicant tried to pacify the applicant, stating their inability to fulfil the demand of dowry so made, but, ultimately they provided him with refrigerator (fridge).

6. It is also contended on behalf of the applicant that the allegations regarding so called demand of dowry, as alleged against him, are false and fabricated and he has been falsely implicated in the present matter. There is no connection between the applicant and the alleged incident whatsoever. Further, it is stated that there is nothing available on record against the applicant, whereby, he may be connected to the alleged crime, punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

7. The applicant is languishing in jail for more than two years since 18.08.2022; and it is requested thus that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 3

8. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has strongly opposed the bail application with the contention that the applicant and the deceased got married on

25.04.2022. Though, it is said to be a love marriage but applicant used to constantly committ atrocities against her by demanding dowry and also used to beat her and just within three months and eleven days, the deceased (Jyoti Vishwas) was found dead on 05.08.2022. The deceased is said to be three months pregnant when she was found dead, lying on the floor and there were marks on the throat and neck and injury marks all over the body, and, as per her autopsy report, the cause of death assigned is “death due to ante-mortem injury leading strangulation and asphyxia”. The time of the death is reported to be less than 24 hours when the autopsy was conducted on the corpse of the deceased.

9. in the autopsy report are said to be as under:- The ante-mortem injury that has been recorded “1. Ligature mark of size 19cm x 1-1/2cm on anterior aspect of neck and B/L lateral aspect in horizontal pattern.

2. Another ligature mark of size 9cm x 1cm on anterior and lt. lateral aspect of neck with upward slunting towards lt. mastoid on further exploration, subcutaneous ecchymosed on further exploration there is fracture of hyoid bone. fats and border margin purchmost Fehynuid (bluish discoloration of size 7x

3. 4cm on poster medical aspect of lt arms. Fehynuid of size 7 x 4cm on outer aspect of

4. Lt arm upper 1/3rd part.

5. Abrasion of size 10 x 1cm on mid of Rt lateral aspect of arm size vertically. “ 4 This clearly shows that the deceased was strangulated, resulting in fracture of her hyoid bone.

10. As per the investigation so far, it is clear that the deceased was subjected to atrocities relating to demand of dowry and ultimately, when she could not fulfill the illegal demand of the applicant, the applicant used to beat her and ultimately strangulated her to death, which is evident from the autopsy report.

11. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, and on the perusal of the records, and not going into the details, as it may affect the merits of the case, it is clear at this juncture that the deceased (Jyoti Vishwas) wife of the applicant had been strangulated to death. The hyoid bone is a u-shape bone in the neck that supports the larynx. It is located between the thyroid cartilage and root of the tongue. It is uncommon that a hyoid bone may get fractured ordinarily, unless the victim meets with an accident that hits the hyoid bone or it is a homicide by strangulation.

12. As per the autopsy report, it is clear that the hyoid bone of the deceased (Jyoti Vishwas) has been shown to be fractured, and it is opined by the concerned doctor, who conducted the autopsy on the corpse of the deceased, that the cause of death is ante-mortem injury, due to strangulation, which resulted in asphyxia. It is worth noting here that the deceased and the applicant got married on 25.04.2022, and, shortly within three months and eleven days i.e. on 05.08.2022, the deceased was found dead and as per the records, it is not an accident, but a homicide. 5

13. This Court, therefore, does not find any reasonable ground, whereby, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Hence, having no sufficient grounds, the Bail Application, is, hereby rejected. ___________________ ASHISH NAITHANI, J. Dt: 03.03.2025 Shiksha