High Court · 2025

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

2. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 485 of 2020, under Sections - 498-A, 304-B, 316 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Banda, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

3. The first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.02.2024, which is reproduced as below:- "1. Heard Sri Anil Srivastava, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant-accused, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant-accused involved in Case Crime No. 485 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B, 316 IPC and Section-3/4 of D. P. Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Banda, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. The allegation that the deceased was being harassed on account of demand of dowry, is wholly false. Marriage of the deceased with applicant was solemnized in 'Samuhik Vivah' programme and thus, there was absolutely no occasion to demand any dowry. It was submitted that in fact, the deceased was suffering from illness and that she was under treatment and she died on 30.6.2020. In postmortem except one minor injury, no other injury has been shown and cause of death could not ascertained, hence, viscera was preserved. As per F. S. L. report, in the viscera some insecticide has been found. After death of the deceased, family members of the deceased were informed and several of her family members were present at the time of inquest proceedings but at that time, no report was lodged but after five days, first information report was lodged making false allegations. Lastly it was submitted that the applicant / accused is in jail since 14.7.2022 and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during trial.

4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the marriage of the deceased has taken place only about one and half year prior to the incident and that there is evidence that the deceased was being harassed on account of demand of dowry. At the time of alleged incident, the deceased was having pregnancy of about eight and half months and that she was not suffering from any serious illness. It was submitted that the material witnesses are yet to be examined by the trial Court.

5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant- accused is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of applicant- accused is hereby rejected.

6. However, keeping in view of the period of incarceration of applicant-accused, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of seven months from the date of production of certified copy of the order, if there is no other legal impediment."

4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The marriage of deceased with applicant was solemnized in 'Samuhik Vivah' programme and the allegations of dowry demand and harassment of deceased are wholly false. It was stated that deceased used to remain ill and she was under depression and committed suicide due to that reason. In postmortem report, no injury has been shown on the body of deceased and cause of death could not be ascertained. As per F.S.L. report, insecticide has been found in viscera of deceased. It is further submitted that first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated

01.02.2024 and Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within a period of seven months. It was stated that the case is still at the stage of prosecution evidence, however, all the material witnesses have been examined. The trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. Now, there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. It was further submitted that applicant is in jail since 14.07.2021 and thus, he has already undergone detention of about three and a half years and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that at the time of incident deceased was at the advanced stage of pregnancy and that she was harassed on account of dowry demand.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts, particularly the period of detention and the fact that material witnesses have already been examined, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for bail is made out. Hence, the present second bail application is hereby allowed.

7. Let the applicant - Shyam Babu involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. iv. The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case.

8. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 SK Srivastava SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

2. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 485 of 2020, under Sections - 498-A, 304-B, 316 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Banda, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

3. The first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 01.02.2024, which is reproduced as below:- "1. Heard Sri Anil Srivastava, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant-accused, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant-accused involved in Case Crime No. 485 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B, 316 IPC and Section-3/4 of D. P. Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Banda, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant is the husband of the deceased. The allegation that the deceased was being harassed on account of demand of dowry, is wholly false. Marriage of the deceased with applicant was solemnized in 'Samuhik Vivah' programme and thus, there was absolutely no occasion to demand any dowry. It was submitted that in fact, the deceased was suffering from illness and that she was under treatment and she died on 30.6.2020. In postmortem except one minor injury, no other injury has been shown and cause of death could not ascertained, hence, viscera was preserved. As per F. S. L. report, in the viscera some insecticide has been found. After death of the deceased, family members of the deceased were informed and several of her family members were present at the time of inquest proceedings but at that time, no report was lodged but after five days, first information report was lodged making false allegations. Lastly it was submitted that the applicant / accused is in jail since 14.7.2022 and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during trial.

4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the marriage of the deceased has taken place only about one and half year prior to the incident and that there is evidence that the deceased was being harassed on account of demand of dowry. At the time of alleged incident, the deceased was having pregnancy of about eight and half months and that she was not suffering from any serious illness. It was submitted that the material witnesses are yet to be examined by the trial Court.

5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant- accused is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the bail application of applicant- accused is hereby rejected.

6. However, keeping in view of the period of incarceration of applicant-accused, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of seven months from the date of production of certified copy of the order, if there is no other legal impediment."

4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The marriage of deceased with applicant was solemnized in 'Samuhik Vivah' programme and the allegations of dowry demand and harassment of deceased are wholly false. It was stated that deceased used to remain ill and she was under depression and committed suicide due to that reason. In postmortem report, no injury has been shown on the body of deceased and cause of death could not be ascertained. As per F.S.L. report, insecticide has been found in viscera of deceased. It is further submitted that first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated

01.02.2024 and Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same preferably within a period of seven months. It was stated that the case is still at the stage of prosecution evidence, however, all the material witnesses have been examined. The trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. Now, there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. It was further submitted that applicant is in jail since 14.07.2021 and thus, he has already undergone detention of about three and a half years and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that at the time of incident deceased was at the advanced stage of pregnancy and that she was harassed on account of dowry demand.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts, particularly the period of detention and the fact that material witnesses have already been examined, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for bail is made out. Hence, the present second bail application is hereby allowed.

7. Let the applicant - Shyam Babu involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. iv. The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case.

8. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 SK Srivastava SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad