High Court · 2025

1. 2nd Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

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

3. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 627 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 315 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kishni, District - Mainpuri, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

4. The first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2024, which is reproduced as below:- "1. Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri I.K. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Manoj Kumar Patel, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

3. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Sessions Trial No. 46 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 627 of 2023, under Sections - 498-A, 304-B, 315 I.P.C. and Section - 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kishni, District - Mainpuri with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

4. It has been argued by learned Senior Advocate that applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. Applicant is husband of deceased and their marriage has taken place in the month of April, 2019 and out of that marriage, they have one child. The allegations of dowry demand and harassment of deceased levelled against the applicant are wholly false. It was submitted that deceased was pregnant and she was under treatment. On the night of incident, while she was going to bathroom, she has suddenly fallen down and sustained injuries. In that connection, a number of persons have submitted affidavits, which have been annexed as Annexure No.8. After incident, the applicant and his family members have taken the deceased to Bhadauriya Hospital and from there she was referred to P.G.I. Saifai but she could not survive. The incident took place on 20.09.2023 but the first information report was lodged after two days on 22.09.2023 and delay in lodging of the first information report has not been explained. After death of deceased, the applicant himself has moved an application to the police for postmortem of deceased. The applicant and his family members as well as the family members of deceased were present at the time of inquest proceedings. In the inquest report also it was mentioned that deceased has suffered injuries accidentally, while she was going to bathroom. Learned Senior Advocate submitted that the facts of the matter and evidence collected during investigation shows that deceased has accidentally suffered injuries due to falling on the ground and the postmortem report also indicates that the injuries sustained by the deceased were suffered accidentally.

5. It is further submitted that as per prosecution version, deceased was being harassed on account of demand of a motorcycle but applicant as well as his brother were already having a motorcycle and thus there was no question of making demand of motorcycle. Further co- accused Gaurav, who is brother of applicant, was also named in the first information report and he has been exonerated during investigation and no charge-sheet was filed against him. Lastly, it was submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 09.10.2023, having no criminal history, and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is evidence that deceased was being harassed on account of dowry. In postmortem report, two injuries have been shown on the body of deceased and cause of death is ante-mortem injury. The defence version that deceased has suffered injuries accidentally, is wholly false. It was submitted that in fact deceased was assaulted by the accused persons, due to which she has sustained injuries and later on died. The delay in lodging of the first information report has taken place due to the reason that accused persons have mislead the informant and his family members. At the time of incident, deceased was having pregnancy of six months.

7. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, gravity of the offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, no case for bail is made out.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application filed on behalf of the applicant - Shivam Kumar @ Shiva is rejected."

5. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is husband of deceased and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The deceased has accidentally fallen down in bathroom and sustained injuries. The concerned doctor has also supported the fact that such injuries are possible by falling on hard surface. It is further submitted that after rejection of first bail application of applicant, three witnesses have been examined and that they have not supported prosecution version and turned hostile. Lastly, it was stated that applicant is in jail since

09.10.2023 and that in case the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that at the time of incident deceased was having pregnancy of six months and she has suffered death due to injuries. There is no plausible explanation as to how the deceased has sustained injuries. The version of defence that deceased has suffered injury accidentally due to fall in bathroom cannot be considered at this stage and that trial of the case is at progress.

7. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts, without expressing any opinion on merits, no case for grant of bail is made out.

8. Accordingly, the instant second bail application filed on behalf of applicant Shivam Kumar @ Shiva is rejected.

9. However, considering the period of detention of applicant, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same, as early as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment.

10. A copy of this order be transmitted to the Trial Court concerned for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 SK Srivastava SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. 2nd Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

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

3. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 627 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 315 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kishni, District - Mainpuri, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

4. The first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 29.04.2024, which is reproduced as below:- "1. Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri I.K. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Manoj Kumar Patel, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

3. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Sessions Trial No. 46 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 627 of 2023, under Sections - 498-A, 304-B, 315 I.P.C. and Section - 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kishni, District - Mainpuri with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

4. It has been argued by learned Senior Advocate that applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. Applicant is husband of deceased and their marriage has taken place in the month of April, 2019 and out of that marriage, they have one child. The allegations of dowry demand and harassment of deceased levelled against the applicant are wholly false. It was submitted that deceased was pregnant and she was under treatment. On the night of incident, while she was going to bathroom, she has suddenly fallen down and sustained injuries. In that connection, a number of persons have submitted affidavits, which have been annexed as Annexure No.8. After incident, the applicant and his family members have taken the deceased to Bhadauriya Hospital and from there she was referred to P.G.I. Saifai but she could not survive. The incident took place on 20.09.2023 but the first information report was lodged after two days on 22.09.2023 and delay in lodging of the first information report has not been explained. After death of deceased, the applicant himself has moved an application to the police for postmortem of deceased. The applicant and his family members as well as the family members of deceased were present at the time of inquest proceedings. In the inquest report also it was mentioned that deceased has suffered injuries accidentally, while she was going to bathroom. Learned Senior Advocate submitted that the facts of the matter and evidence collected during investigation shows that deceased has accidentally suffered injuries due to falling on the ground and the postmortem report also indicates that the injuries sustained by the deceased were suffered accidentally.

5. It is further submitted that as per prosecution version, deceased was being harassed on account of demand of a motorcycle but applicant as well as his brother were already having a motorcycle and thus there was no question of making demand of motorcycle. Further co- accused Gaurav, who is brother of applicant, was also named in the first information report and he has been exonerated during investigation and no charge-sheet was filed against him. Lastly, it was submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 09.10.2023, having no criminal history, and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is evidence that deceased was being harassed on account of dowry. In postmortem report, two injuries have been shown on the body of deceased and cause of death is ante-mortem injury. The defence version that deceased has suffered injuries accidentally, is wholly false. It was submitted that in fact deceased was assaulted by the accused persons, due to which she has sustained injuries and later on died. The delay in lodging of the first information report has taken place due to the reason that accused persons have mislead the informant and his family members. At the time of incident, deceased was having pregnancy of six months.

7. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations, gravity of the offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, no case for bail is made out.

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application filed on behalf of the applicant - Shivam Kumar @ Shiva is rejected."

5. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is husband of deceased and he has been falsely implicated in this case. The deceased has accidentally fallen down in bathroom and sustained injuries. The concerned doctor has also supported the fact that such injuries are possible by falling on hard surface. It is further submitted that after rejection of first bail application of applicant, three witnesses have been examined and that they have not supported prosecution version and turned hostile. Lastly, it was stated that applicant is in jail since

09.10.2023 and that in case the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that at the time of incident deceased was having pregnancy of six months and she has suffered death due to injuries. There is no plausible explanation as to how the deceased has sustained injuries. The version of defence that deceased has suffered injury accidentally due to fall in bathroom cannot be considered at this stage and that trial of the case is at progress.

7. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts, without expressing any opinion on merits, no case for grant of bail is made out.

8. Accordingly, the instant second bail application filed on behalf of applicant Shivam Kumar @ Shiva is rejected.

9. However, considering the period of detention of applicant, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same, as early as possible, preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment.

10. A copy of this order be transmitted to the Trial Court concerned for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 SK Srivastava SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad