State of U.P v. Counsel for
Case Details
3-As per the prosecution case in brief, complainant Smt. Meena Bishnoi, who is mother of the deceased-Sneha Bishnoi got a first information report lodged on 19.05.2025 against Madhu Gupta, Arun Kumar, Ashish Gupta (applicant), Deepak Gupta and Swati Gupta who are mother-in-law, father-in-law, husband, brother-in-law (jeth) and sister-in-law of the deceased respectively stating inter-alia that the marriage of her daughter was solemnized with the applicant on 04.05.2023 and for the last two years, the accused persons were harassing her daughter by demanding additional dowry. F.I.R. further alleges that on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, her daughter was beaten by the accused persons and she was done to death in her matrimonial home. The information about the said incident was received to her at 05:00 p.m. and thereafter, the accused persons left her daughter in the hospital and ran away. 4-It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is husband of the deceased and he has been falsely implicated in this 2 BAIL No. 32246 of 2025 case. The allegation of demand of dowry has been levelled against the applicant but it has not been specified that what was the demand in dowry from the side of applicant, hence, the said allegation is wholly false, vague and against the evidence available on record. It is next submitted incident, in question, took place on
19.05.2025 at about 05:00 p.m. and the deceased was immediately taken to the hospital by the applicant at about 05:15 p.m. where she was declared as brought dead. Thereafter, Sant Ram (ward boy of the hospital) gave an information to the police on 19.05.2025 at about 06:07 p.m. and he was also very much present at the time of inquest wherein he has stated inter-alia that the applicant had brought the deceased to the hospital and as per inquest report, deceased died by committing suicide. Much emphasis has been given by contending that in fact on account of medical issues, deceased was unable to conceive a baby and after making efforts twice, when it was not possible for her to deliver a child, then under the advice of a doctor, a child was born through surrogacy on 03.04.2025 but unfortunately, he could not survive and died after seven days' on 11.04.2025 in the hospital. Thereafter, the deceased went on deep depression and on account of this reason, she committed suicide. It is also pointed out that the dead body of the deceased was taken out from the room after breaking the door of the room. Lastly it is submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit and is languishing in jail since 22.05.2025. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. 5-Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant reiterating the prosecution case as mentioned in the F.I.R. but could not dispute the factum of the as argued on behalf of the applicant. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that as per the post- mortem report, cause of death of the deceased is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging and expect a ligature mark, no other injury was found on the body of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was brought out from a room after breaking it's door. 3 BAIL No. 32246 of 2025 7-The further details relating to the incident need not be referred to herein since the allegations and the defence thereto is still open to be urged by the parties in the trial Court. However, it is relevant to mention that there is no dispute that the parameters for bail of accused pending trial and conviction or acquittal of accused after adducing evidences by both the parties before the trial Court are different. This Court is of the view that each case turns on its own facts and circumstances. Even a little difference between the facts of two cases, may alter the entire aspect. 8-In view of the provisions under Section 117 and 118 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, it is not that the Courts will shut eyes and act as a silent spectator in all the cases while considering bail applications, the Courts are duty bound to consider broader aspect of the matter and in the light of nature of allegations, the relevant materials of the case diary either produced by the complainant's side or by the accused's side cannot be ignored because bail matters are also related to the valuable liberty of the accused. 9-Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. 10-Let the applicant-Ashish Gupta, 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) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any 4 BAIL No. 32246 of 2025 criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. 11-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. September 19, 2025 Saurabh (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3-As per the prosecution case in brief, complainant Smt. Meena Bishnoi, who is mother of the deceased-Sneha Bishnoi got a first information report lodged on 19.05.2025 against Madhu Gupta, Arun Kumar, Ashish Gupta (applicant), Deepak Gupta and Swati Gupta who are mother-in-law, father-in-law, husband, brother-in-law (jeth) and sister-in-law of the deceased respectively stating inter-alia that the marriage of her daughter was solemnized with the applicant on 04.05.2023 and for the last two years, the accused persons were harassing her daughter by demanding additional dowry. F.I.R. further alleges that on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, her daughter was beaten by the accused persons and she was done to death in her matrimonial home. The information about the said incident was received to her at 05:00 p.m. and thereafter, the accused persons left her daughter in the hospital and ran away. 4-It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is husband of the deceased and he has been falsely implicated in this 2 BAIL No. 32246 of 2025 case. The allegation of demand of dowry has been levelled against the applicant but it has not been specified that what was the demand in dowry from the side of applicant, hence, the said allegation is wholly false, vague and against the evidence available on record. It is next submitted incident, in question, took place on
19.05.2025 at about 05:00 p.m. and the deceased was immediately taken to the hospital by the applicant at about 05:15 p.m. where she was declared as brought dead. Thereafter, Sant Ram (ward boy of the hospital) gave an information to the police on 19.05.2025 at about 06:07 p.m. and he was also very much present at the time of inquest wherein he has stated inter-alia that the applicant had brought the deceased to the hospital and as per inquest report, deceased died by committing suicide. Much emphasis has been given by contending that in fact on account of medical issues, deceased was unable to conceive a baby and after making efforts twice, when it was not possible for her to deliver a child, then under the advice of a doctor, a child was born through surrogacy on 03.04.2025 but unfortunately, he could not survive and died after seven days' on 11.04.2025 in the hospital. Thereafter, the deceased went on deep depression and on account of this reason, she committed suicide. It is also pointed out that the dead body of the deceased was taken out from the room after breaking the door of the room. Lastly it is submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit and is languishing in jail since 22.05.2025. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. 5-Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant reiterating the prosecution case as mentioned in the F.I.R. but could not dispute the factum of the as argued on behalf of the applicant. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that as per the post- mortem report, cause of death of the deceased is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging and expect a ligature mark, no other injury was found on the body of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was brought out from a room after breaking it's door. 3 BAIL No. 32246 of 2025 7-The further details relating to the incident need not be referred to herein since the allegations and the defence thereto is still open to be urged by the parties in the trial Court. However, it is relevant to mention that there is no dispute that the parameters for bail of accused pending trial and conviction or acquittal of accused after adducing evidences by both the parties before the trial Court are different. This Court is of the view that each case turns on its own facts and circumstances. Even a little difference between the facts of two cases, may alter the entire aspect. 8-In view of the provisions under Section 117 and 118 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, it is not that the Courts will shut eyes and act as a silent spectator in all the cases while considering bail applications, the Courts are duty bound to consider broader aspect of the matter and in the light of nature of allegations, the relevant materials of the case diary either produced by the complainant's side or by the accused's side cannot be ignored because bail matters are also related to the valuable liberty of the accused. 9-Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. 10-Let the applicant-Ashish Gupta, 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) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any 4 BAIL No. 32246 of 2025 criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. 11-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. September 19, 2025 Saurabh (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad