State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha and Others) arising out of Case Crime No

2. Heard Sri Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Premwati seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Sessions Trial No.0119 of 2024 (State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.0053 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 316 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dakore, District Jalaun.

4. This is a second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 26.7.2024 passed by Hon'ble Deepak Verma, J. in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.22821 of 2024. Subsequently the matter was released by the said Bench and matter was directed to be placed before Hon'ble The Chief Justice for nomination vide order dated 30.4.2025. Thereafter the matter has been ordered to be listed before the appropriate Court dealing with such matters vide order dated 8.5.2025 passed by Hon'ble The Chief Justice. The matter is thus before the Court.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued as follows: (i) The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. (ii) The applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased Deepti. (iii) The marriage of the deceased Deepti was solemnized with Ranjeet Singh Kushwaha, the son of the applicant on 15.2.2023. (iv) General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant. There is a suicide note allegedly written by the deceased which was recovered from her bed-room and the same has been made part of the case diary and the investigation, in the same there is no complaint regarding any demand of dowry. (v) As per postmortem examination report, the deceased was found to have received leaner abrasion and an abrasion also on her body but the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging, as such injury did not contribute to her death. (vi) The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 30 and is in jail since 6.4.2024. (viii) The applicant is a lady and she is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C. (ix) Co-accused Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha, the husband of the deceased has been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 3.1.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.46072 of 2024 (Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order has been produced by learned counsel for the applicant, the same is taken on record. The said order reads as under:- "1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Sessions Trial No.0119 of 2024 (State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.0053 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 316 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dakore, District Jalaun, during the pendency of trial.

4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 15.02.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of a motorcycle as dowry, leading her to death on 03.04.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. Even the suicide note does not indicate any foul play at the part of the applicant. Learned counsel has further stated that the two witnesses of fact have been examined, namely, PW- 1 and PW-2, and have not supported the prosecution story. There is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the instant case. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging.

6. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.04.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant-Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) 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.

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses."

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

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante- mortem hanging. Co-accused Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha, the husband of the deceased has been granted bail. The applicant is a lady.

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-Smt. Premwati, 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. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Gaurav Kuls GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Premwati seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Sessions Trial No.0119 of 2024 (State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.0053 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 316 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dakore, District Jalaun.

4. This is a second bail application. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 26.7.2024 passed by Hon'ble Deepak Verma, J. in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.22821 of 2024. Subsequently the matter was released by the said Bench and matter was directed to be placed before Hon'ble The Chief Justice for nomination vide order dated 30.4.2025. Thereafter the matter has been ordered to be listed before the appropriate Court dealing with such matters vide order dated 8.5.2025 passed by Hon'ble The Chief Justice. The matter is thus before the Court.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued as follows: (i) The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. (ii) The applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased Deepti. (iii) The marriage of the deceased Deepti was solemnized with Ranjeet Singh Kushwaha, the son of the applicant on 15.2.2023. (iv) General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant. There is a suicide note allegedly written by the deceased which was recovered from her bed-room and the same has been made part of the case diary and the investigation, in the same there is no complaint regarding any demand of dowry. (v) As per postmortem examination report, the deceased was found to have received leaner abrasion and an abrasion also on her body but the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging, as such injury did not contribute to her death. (vi) The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 30 and is in jail since 6.4.2024. (viii) The applicant is a lady and she is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C. (ix) Co-accused Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha, the husband of the deceased has been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 3.1.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.46072 of 2024 (Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order has been produced by learned counsel for the applicant, the same is taken on record. The said order reads as under:- "1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Sessions Trial No.0119 of 2024 (State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.0053 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 316 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dakore, District Jalaun, during the pendency of trial.

4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 15.02.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of a motorcycle as dowry, leading her to death on 03.04.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. Even the suicide note does not indicate any foul play at the part of the applicant. Learned counsel has further stated that the two witnesses of fact have been examined, namely, PW- 1 and PW-2, and have not supported the prosecution story. There is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the instant case. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging.

6. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.04.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicant-Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) 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.

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses."

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

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante- mortem hanging. Co-accused Ranjit Kumar Kushwaha, the husband of the deceased has been granted bail. The applicant is a lady.

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-Smt. Premwati, 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. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Gaurav Kuls GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad