High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri Radhey Shyam Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Manoj Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 173 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Khudaganj, District Shahjahanpur.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 02.06.2024 by Kalyan Singh against the applicant, Smt. Maina Devi (mother-in-law), Ramveer (father-in-law), Neetu (nand) and Vikas (devar) with the allegation that his daughter Julie was married to the applicant around five years ago in which he had given lot of gifts and dowry but the accused persons used to torture her for dowry and there was demand for it. On 02.06.2024 at about 4 am he received an information that his daughter Julie has died. When he went to her house he found her body to be lying in the courtyard and saw a saree hanging from hook of the roof. The accused persons have murdered his daughter. A report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, she was found to have received a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. It is submitted that although in the first information report 05 persons are named as accused but after investigation Neetu (nand) and Vikas (devar) of the deceased have been exonerated whereas charge- sheet has been submitted only against the applicant, father-in-law and mother-in- law of the deceased. While placing paragraph 18 of the affidavit it is submitted that the applicant and the deceased were leading a happy married life as would be evident from the fact that two children aged about 04 years and 11/2 years were born from the wedlock. Further while placing supplementary affidavit dated

08.04.2025 it is submitted that trial in the present matter is going on in which the first informant Kallu @ Kalyan Singh has been examined as P.W.-1 who did not support the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. It is further submitted that Smt. Arna @ Ramgeeta wife of the first informant and the mother of the deceased was examined as P.W.-2 before the trial court who has also not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile, the certified copy of the said statements have been placed before the Court which are annexed as Annexure-SA-1 and SA-2 to the said supplementary affidavit respectively. It is argued that co- accused Smt. Maina the mother-in-law and Ramveer the father-in-law of the deceased have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 06.09.2024 and 06.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 33056 of 2024 and 40264 of 2024, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-8 to the affidavit. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 17.06.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased but with regard to other arguments relating to the factual aspects of the matter, the same were not disputed and denied by learned counsel for the State.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased and the applicant had two children from their wedlock. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging and the deceased Julie was found to have received a single ligature mark on her body. The trial in the matter has started in which two witnesses have been examined who have been declared hostile. There were five accused named in the first information report out of which two have been exonerated whereas charge-sheet has been submitted only against the applicant and two other persons. Co-accused Smt. Maina the mother-in-law and Ramveer the father-in-law of the deceased have been granted bail.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant- Manoj Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Radhey Shyam Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Manoj Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 173 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Khudaganj, District Shahjahanpur.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 02.06.2024 by Kalyan Singh against the applicant, Smt. Maina Devi (mother-in-law), Ramveer (father-in-law), Neetu (nand) and Vikas (devar) with the allegation that his daughter Julie was married to the applicant around five years ago in which he had given lot of gifts and dowry but the accused persons used to torture her for dowry and there was demand for it. On 02.06.2024 at about 4 am he received an information that his daughter Julie has died. When he went to her house he found her body to be lying in the courtyard and saw a saree hanging from hook of the roof. The accused persons have murdered his daughter. A report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, she was found to have received a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. It is submitted that although in the first information report 05 persons are named as accused but after investigation Neetu (nand) and Vikas (devar) of the deceased have been exonerated whereas charge- sheet has been submitted only against the applicant, father-in-law and mother-in- law of the deceased. While placing paragraph 18 of the affidavit it is submitted that the applicant and the deceased were leading a happy married life as would be evident from the fact that two children aged about 04 years and 11/2 years were born from the wedlock. Further while placing supplementary affidavit dated

08.04.2025 it is submitted that trial in the present matter is going on in which the first informant Kallu @ Kalyan Singh has been examined as P.W.-1 who did not support the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. It is further submitted that Smt. Arna @ Ramgeeta wife of the first informant and the mother of the deceased was examined as P.W.-2 before the trial court who has also not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile, the certified copy of the said statements have been placed before the Court which are annexed as Annexure-SA-1 and SA-2 to the said supplementary affidavit respectively. It is argued that co- accused Smt. Maina the mother-in-law and Ramveer the father-in-law of the deceased have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 06.09.2024 and 06.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 33056 of 2024 and 40264 of 2024, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-8 to the affidavit. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 17.06.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased but with regard to other arguments relating to the factual aspects of the matter, the same were not disputed and denied by learned counsel for the State.

7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased and the applicant had two children from their wedlock. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging and the deceased Julie was found to have received a single ligature mark on her body. The trial in the matter has started in which two witnesses have been examined who have been declared hostile. There were five accused named in the first information report out of which two have been exonerated whereas charge-sheet has been submitted only against the applicant and two other persons. Co-accused Smt. Maina the mother-in-law and Ramveer the father-in-law of the deceased have been granted bail.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant- Manoj Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad