High Court · 2025

1. Mr. M.K. Ray, learned counsel for t he applicant . 2. Mr. Akshay Lat wal, learned A.G.A. for t he St at e. Present applicant Dinesh Gangwar 3. is praying for regular bail in relat ion t o FI R dat ed 04.09.2023, bearing FI R No. regist ered at P.S. 0071 of 2023 Zhankaiya, Dist rict Udham Singh Nagar wherein t he present applicant has been t he offence punishable im plicat ed under Sect ion 304B I PC. 4. Learned counsel for t he applicant subm it s t hat t he applicant is innocent and has been im plicat ed. The falsely applicant m arried wit h t he deceased five years back from t he dat e of t he incident . He subm it s t hat t here is no evidence wit h regard t o t he dem and of dowry and m ost of t he independent wit nesses who were exam ined and are neighbour of t he applicant have denied t his fact t hat t here was any issue of dem and of dowry. Apart from t his, he subm it s t hat as per t he st at em ent of t here was no suicidal not e and it is purely a case of t hose subm it s hanging. He t hat independent t heir wit nesses t here was exam inat ion subm it s quarrel in bet ween t he applicant and t he deceased which in fact is a daily rout ine and t hat m ay be a reason t he wife of t he applicant com m it t ed suicide by hanging. 5. Learned counsel for t he applicant subm it s t hat since t here is no evidence wit h regard t o t he dem and of dowry, t herefore, t he offence punishable under t hat I .O. t he t he t hat regist rat ion of Sect ion 304B I PC is not m ade out . Apart from t his he subm it s t hat t here is an inordinat e delay in lodging t he FI R since t he deceased com m it t ed suicide on 02.06.2023 but t he FI R has been lodged on 04.09.2023 by t he m ot her of t he t oo on an applicat ion deceased m oved under Sect ion 156( 3) Cr.P.C. in which t he concerned Magist rat e ordered t he FI R. He subm it s t hat in t he prelim inary inquiry which was carried out by t he police official t here was no evidence of dem and of dowry and t hat was t he reason t he FI R was not lodged and t his appears t o be a case of false im plicat ion. Apart from t his, learned counsel for 6. t he applicant subm it s t hat t he charge sheet has been filed in a wrong prem ise. There was no proof wit h regard t o t he t he dem and of dowry and as per m andat e of Sect ion 304B t here should be a dem and of dowry. 7. On t he ot her side, Mr. Lat wal, learned A.G.A. seriously opposed t he bail applicat ion and subm it s t hat t he conduct of t he present applicant being husband of t he deceased appears t o be doubt ful t he deceased was since deat h of unnat ural but no at t em pt was m ade by t he present applicant being husband for lodging t he FI R. He also subm it s t hat in respect of unnat ural deat h t hat t oo by way of hanging why t he FI R was not lodged, t his is t he subj ect m at t er of t he t rial t herefore no com m ent can be m ade on t his. He furt her subm it s t hat since t he FI R was regist ered on t he basis of t he order passed by t he Magist rat e on an applicat ion m oved under Sect ion 156( 3) Cr.P.C. by t he m ot her of t he deceased and aft er t horough invest igat ion and also furt her t he st at em ent of t he independent wit ness, charge sheet was filed. Apart from t his, he furt her referred clause 7 of t he FI R int o considerat ion t aking I PC t here t he case of Aft er hearing argum ent s of is a reference of one wherein person, nam ely, Kundan Kanyal who support t he prosecut ion part icularly wit h regard t o t he dem and of dowry. t he 8. t he part ies and learned counsel furt her t he conduct of t he present applicant , t his Court is of t he view t hat t he applicant does not deserve for bail. 9. rej ect ed. Accordingly, t he bail applicat ion is int o considerat ion t aking ( Ra k e sh Th a p l i y a l , J.) 0 5 .0 4 .2 0 2 5 Parul