High Court · 2025

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9845 of 2025 Applicant :- Vijaypal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chandra Srivastava,Vishnu Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Prakash Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S has been filed by the applicant- Vijaypal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.305 of 2024, Case No.5 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80 (2) B.N.S., 2023 and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Rajpura, District Sambhal.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 22.9.2024 by Ved Prakash against Sanju, Vijaypal (the applicant) and Smt. Kamlesh alleging therein that his sister Pinki was married to Sanju around three years ago. After marriage the accused persons used to assault her and torture her and there was a demand of Rs.5 lakh as dowry along with a gold chain, a gold ring and a bullet motorcycle. On 20.9.2024 all the three accused persons assaulted his sister due to which she had fever after which on the pretext of giving medicines for fever, she was given poison which she consumed and her condition deteriorated. Her father-in-law and mother-in-law took her to Aligarh Dipti Hospital. On 21.9.2024 Station House Officer came and at about 1.20 a.m. recorded the statement of Pinki but on 22.9.2024 she died. The FIR be thus lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. It is argued that in the present matter Sanju, the husband of the deceased has been exonerated. The deceased was admitted in the hospital on 21.9.2024 and she died on 22.9.2024. A dying-declaration of the deceased was recorded while being admitted in the hospital on 21.9.2024 in which she states that her father-in-law had assaulted her after which she had called the police and thereafter again her father-in-law assaulted her and then her mother-in-law brought poison/sulphas and gave her to eat which she consumed. It is submitted that although in the said dying-declaration it is submitted that her father-in-law and mother-in-law both are responsible for the incident but there is no overt-act assigned to the applicant inasmuch as the postmortem report does not show any bodily injury on the body of the deceased and thus the allegation of the father-in- law assaulting the deceased is not corroborated. It is argued that the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Smt. Kamlesh who is the mother-in-law of the deceased who has been specifically assigned the role of bringing two tablets of Sulphas and giving it to the deceased for consuming it which was consumed by her. The applicant is aged about 60 years and is an old man. It is further submitted that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted against the applicant and Smt. Kamlesh, the mother-in-law of the deceased whereas the husband of the deceased has been exonerated. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 21 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 10.10.2024.

6. Per contra learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The husband of the deceased has been exonerated. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co- accused Smt. Kamlesh, the mother-in-law of the deceased. The charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. No overt act of indulging in any act for poisoning has been assigned to the applicant in the dying declaration.

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-Vijaypal, 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 84 BNSS, 2023, may be issued and if applicant (s) fails/fail 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 209 BNS, 2023. (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 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 269 BNS, 2023. (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. Order Date :- 7.4.2025/Gaurav Kuls (Samit Gopal, J.) GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9845 of 2025 Applicant :- Vijaypal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chandra Srivastava,Vishnu Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Prakash Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S has been filed by the applicant- Vijaypal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.305 of 2024, Case No.5 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80 (2) B.N.S., 2023 and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Rajpura, District Sambhal.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 22.9.2024 by Ved Prakash against Sanju, Vijaypal (the applicant) and Smt. Kamlesh alleging therein that his sister Pinki was married to Sanju around three years ago. After marriage the accused persons used to assault her and torture her and there was a demand of Rs.5 lakh as dowry along with a gold chain, a gold ring and a bullet motorcycle. On 20.9.2024 all the three accused persons assaulted his sister due to which she had fever after which on the pretext of giving medicines for fever, she was given poison which she consumed and her condition deteriorated. Her father-in-law and mother-in-law took her to Aligarh Dipti Hospital. On 21.9.2024 Station House Officer came and at about 1.20 a.m. recorded the statement of Pinki but on 22.9.2024 she died. The FIR be thus lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. It is argued that in the present matter Sanju, the husband of the deceased has been exonerated. The deceased was admitted in the hospital on 21.9.2024 and she died on 22.9.2024. A dying-declaration of the deceased was recorded while being admitted in the hospital on 21.9.2024 in which she states that her father-in-law had assaulted her after which she had called the police and thereafter again her father-in-law assaulted her and then her mother-in-law brought poison/sulphas and gave her to eat which she consumed. It is submitted that although in the said dying-declaration it is submitted that her father-in-law and mother-in-law both are responsible for the incident but there is no overt-act assigned to the applicant inasmuch as the postmortem report does not show any bodily injury on the body of the deceased and thus the allegation of the father-in- law assaulting the deceased is not corroborated. It is argued that the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused Smt. Kamlesh who is the mother-in-law of the deceased who has been specifically assigned the role of bringing two tablets of Sulphas and giving it to the deceased for consuming it which was consumed by her. The applicant is aged about 60 years and is an old man. It is further submitted that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted against the applicant and Smt. Kamlesh, the mother-in-law of the deceased whereas the husband of the deceased has been exonerated. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 21 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 10.10.2024.

6. Per contra learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. The husband of the deceased has been exonerated. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co- accused Smt. Kamlesh, the mother-in-law of the deceased. The charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. No overt act of indulging in any act for poisoning has been assigned to the applicant in the dying declaration.

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-Vijaypal, 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 84 BNSS, 2023, may be issued and if applicant (s) fails/fail 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 209 BNS, 2023. (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 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 269 BNS, 2023. (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. Order Date :- 7.4.2025/Gaurav Kuls (Samit Gopal, J.) GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad