State of U.P v. Party

4. Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

5. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 250 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mohammadabad, District- Ghazipur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 14.07.2023 after considering the fact that he is husband of the deceased and his wife died under abnormal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and there was also allegation of demand of dowry but he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since

27.10.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded.

7. He further submitted that till date, out of 28 witnesses of the charge sheet, only one witness could be examined, therefore, trial of the case is moving 2 BAIL No. 6827 of 2024 with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

8. He further submitted that there is no evidence that applicant is causing delay in trial.

9. He further submitted that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in serious cases, he can be released on bail and considering the fact of the case, it cannot be infered that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated.

10. He further submitted that as far as merit of the present matter is concerned, even from the postmortem report, it reflects that deceased died due to hanging, therefore, prima facie, it appears to be a case of suicidal death.

11. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history.

12. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died under abnormal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and however, postmortem report suggest that she died due to hanging but she sustained number of injuries. However, learned AGA could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter for last more than two and half years and till date, out of 28 witnesses of the charge sheet, only one witness could be examined.

13. Learned AGA further could not disputed the fact that there is no allegation that applicant is causing delay in trial.

14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

15. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within seven years of her marriage though by hanging but she sustained number of injuries but it reflects, applicant is in jail in the present matter 3 BAIL No. 6827 of 2024 since 27.10.2022 i.e. for last almost three years and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded.

16. Considering the long incarceration of the applicant, a report was called from the court concerned, which is now on record and from its perusal, it reflects, even till date, out of 28 witnesses of the charge sheet, only one witness could be examined and from the report it could not be reflected that applicant is adopting any delaying tactics, therefore, it reflects that without any fault of the applicant, trial of the case is being lingering on and there is no hope of early disposal of the trial.

17. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in serious cases, he can be released on bail.

18. Applicant is in jail in the present matter since 27.10.2022 i.e. for last almost three years and there is no allegation that he is causing delay in trial therefore it cannot be held that fundamental right of speedy trial of applicant has not been violated. Further, however, it reflects from postmortem report of the deceased that she has sustained number of injuries but postmortem report suggest that she died due to hanging, therefore, argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that, prima facie, it appears to be a case of suicidal death, cannot be disbelived at this stage, especially considering the fact that even her hyoid bone was found intact.

19. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history.

20. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty, an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application of an accused should not be dismissed either for punitive or preventive purpose.

21. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

22. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

23. Let the applicant- Sanjay Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to 4 BAIL No. 6827 of 2024 the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

24. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

25. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 18, 2025 #Vik/- (Sameer Jain,J.) VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

4. Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

5. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 250 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mohammadabad, District- Ghazipur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 14.07.2023 after considering the fact that he is husband of the deceased and his wife died under abnormal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and there was also allegation of demand of dowry but he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that in the present matter, applicant is in jail since

27.10.2022 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded.

7. He further submitted that till date, out of 28 witnesses of the charge sheet, only one witness could be examined, therefore, trial of the case is moving 2 BAIL No. 6827 of 2024 with languid pace and there is no hope of its early disposal.

8. He further submitted that there is no evidence that applicant is causing delay in trial.

9. He further submitted that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in serious cases, he can be released on bail and considering the fact of the case, it cannot be infered that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated.

10. He further submitted that as far as merit of the present matter is concerned, even from the postmortem report, it reflects that deceased died due to hanging, therefore, prima facie, it appears to be a case of suicidal death.

11. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history.

12. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died under abnormal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and however, postmortem report suggest that she died due to hanging but she sustained number of injuries. However, learned AGA could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter for last more than two and half years and till date, out of 28 witnesses of the charge sheet, only one witness could be examined.

13. Learned AGA further could not disputed the fact that there is no allegation that applicant is causing delay in trial.

14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

15. However, this is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within seven years of her marriage though by hanging but she sustained number of injuries but it reflects, applicant is in jail in the present matter 3 BAIL No. 6827 of 2024 since 27.10.2022 i.e. for last almost three years and till date, trial of the case could not be concluded.

16. Considering the long incarceration of the applicant, a report was called from the court concerned, which is now on record and from its perusal, it reflects, even till date, out of 28 witnesses of the charge sheet, only one witness could be examined and from the report it could not be reflected that applicant is adopting any delaying tactics, therefore, it reflects that without any fault of the applicant, trial of the case is being lingering on and there is no hope of early disposal of the trial.

17. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that right of speedy trial is the fundamental right of an accused and on its violation, even in serious cases, he can be released on bail.

18. Applicant is in jail in the present matter since 27.10.2022 i.e. for last almost three years and there is no allegation that he is causing delay in trial therefore it cannot be held that fundamental right of speedy trial of applicant has not been violated. Further, however, it reflects from postmortem report of the deceased that she has sustained number of injuries but postmortem report suggest that she died due to hanging, therefore, argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that, prima facie, it appears to be a case of suicidal death, cannot be disbelived at this stage, especially considering the fact that even her hyoid bone was found intact.

19. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history.

20. Further, law is settled, unless proven guilty, an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application of an accused should not be dismissed either for punitive or preventive purpose.

21. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

22. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

23. Let the applicant- Sanjay Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to 4 BAIL No. 6827 of 2024 the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

24. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

25. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 18, 2025 #Vik/- (Sameer Jain,J.) VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad