High Court · 2025

2. Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Akash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sikandar B. Kochar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Saifai, District Etawah, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY :

4. As per FIR, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu rites on 04.12.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the deceased to cruelty for demand of a plot as dowry and thereby led her to death on 02.06.2024. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT :

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has stated that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. There is no time of offence mentioned in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by more than one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

6. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the inquest report was prepared well before the institution of the FIR on 03.06.2024 and it was complete by 9:20 a.m. the same day. The information at the police station was given by the informant (who is the witness of the inquest proceedings) on 03.06.2024 at 7:09 a.m. Even the said entry in G.D., having G.D. No.12 mentions that the informant was told that his daughter has committed suicide by hanging herself.

7. Learned Senior Counsel has next argued that there are call details of the deceased person which are on record. There are nine video calls on the mobile of the deceased person in the evening of 02.06.2024 which indicates that the deceased was in regular contact with some person. There are other video calls on the mobile of the deceased person earlier on also, as she was having some relationship with one Rahul @ Dipak, as such it is a clear cut case of false implication.

8. Learned Senior Counsel has placed much reliance on the suicide note of the deceased person, which is quoted hereinbelow :- "हम बहहत मजबबूर हहै इस ककाम कको करनने कने ललिए मनेरने पकास ककोई रकास्तका नहीሻ हहै मनेररी ज़ज़िन्दगरी बहहत अच्छरी थरी लिनेज़कन ककछ गलिज़तयोሱ ककी वजह सने महै मजबबूर हको गयरी हह मनेरने ललिए सब सहरी थने मनेरका घर पररवकार ससकरकालि पटवकाररी (यततद) सब सहरी थने ककछ गलिज़तयका पटवकाररी नने भरी मनेरने सकाथ ककी पर ममनने ज़कसरी कको ककछ नहीሻ बतकायका ककछ बकातने दरीदरी कको भरी पतका हहै आपनने मकझसने शकादरी पቚኖपट቏ኍ कने ललिए ककी थरी इसललिए मकझसने रकोज़ि दबकाव बनतका थका महै अपनरी मज़ि቏ኍ सने सब कर रहरी हहूሺ मकझने मजबबूर ज़कयका गयका यह सब ककाम करनने कने ललिए"

9. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the said suicide note itself indicates that the deceased person was under self compulsion to commit suicide as she had no other option left in her life. It is also mentioned in her suicide note that she had committed certain mistakes in her life, although she has indicated that the applicant has also committed some mistakes which indicates that the deceased had committed suicide due to guilt in her mind and not as an abetment of the applicant.

10. Learned Senior Counsel has next argued that there is no forensic analysis of the said suicide note to verify whether the said suicide note was in the handwriting of the deceased person. It is further argued that as far as the applicant is concerned, he was posted at Shahjahanpur and the occurrence is of Etawah which is far away from the place of occurrence. It is further stated that there are 24 bighas of land in the name of father of the applicant, as such there was no question for the applicant or his family members for demanding a plot in dowry.

11. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that father of the applicant had given the information to the family of the informant as bonafide act, as such the applicant is entitled for bail. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.06.2024. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF INFORMANT / A.G.A. :

12. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail on the ground that the inquest report was prepared and it was mentioned that the informant was told that his daughter has committed suicide. The cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging.

13. Learned counsel for the informant has placed reliance on the same suicide note which indicates in its later part that the marriage was solemnized seeing property of the deceased and she was being pressurized every now and then, as such she has been forced to commit suicide. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the averment of sister of the deceased person Jyoti, who has categorically stated that there was demand of a plot from the deceased person and the said demand was made on 01.06.2024 i.e one day prior to the incident which comes within the category of 'soon before her death', as such ingredients of Section 304-B IPC are fulfilled. CONCLUSION :

14. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is the husband of the deceased person and the demand of dowry was made one day prior to her death and there being a suicide note indicating complicity of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.

15. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.

16. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

17. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Akash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sikandar B. Kochar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Saifai, District Etawah, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY :

4. As per FIR, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu rites on 04.12.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the deceased to cruelty for demand of a plot as dowry and thereby led her to death on 02.06.2024. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT :

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has stated that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. There is no time of offence mentioned in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by more than one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

6. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the inquest report was prepared well before the institution of the FIR on 03.06.2024 and it was complete by 9:20 a.m. the same day. The information at the police station was given by the informant (who is the witness of the inquest proceedings) on 03.06.2024 at 7:09 a.m. Even the said entry in G.D., having G.D. No.12 mentions that the informant was told that his daughter has committed suicide by hanging herself.

7. Learned Senior Counsel has next argued that there are call details of the deceased person which are on record. There are nine video calls on the mobile of the deceased person in the evening of 02.06.2024 which indicates that the deceased was in regular contact with some person. There are other video calls on the mobile of the deceased person earlier on also, as she was having some relationship with one Rahul @ Dipak, as such it is a clear cut case of false implication.

8. Learned Senior Counsel has placed much reliance on the suicide note of the deceased person, which is quoted hereinbelow :- "हम बहहत मजबबूर हहै इस ककाम कको करनने कने ललिए मनेरने पकास ककोई रकास्तका नहीሻ हहै मनेररी ज़ज़िन्दगरी बहहत अच्छरी थरी लिनेज़कन ककछ गलिज़तयोሱ ककी वजह सने महै मजबबूर हको गयरी हह मनेरने ललिए सब सहरी थने मनेरका घर पररवकार ससकरकालि पटवकाररी (यततद) सब सहरी थने ककछ गलिज़तयका पटवकाररी नने भरी मनेरने सकाथ ककी पर ममनने ज़कसरी कको ककछ नहीሻ बतकायका ककछ बकातने दरीदरी कको भरी पतका हहै आपनने मकझसने शकादरी पቚኖपट቏ኍ कने ललिए ककी थरी इसललिए मकझसने रकोज़ि दबकाव बनतका थका महै अपनरी मज़ि቏ኍ सने सब कर रहरी हहूሺ मकझने मजबबूर ज़कयका गयका यह सब ककाम करनने कने ललिए"

9. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the said suicide note itself indicates that the deceased person was under self compulsion to commit suicide as she had no other option left in her life. It is also mentioned in her suicide note that she had committed certain mistakes in her life, although she has indicated that the applicant has also committed some mistakes which indicates that the deceased had committed suicide due to guilt in her mind and not as an abetment of the applicant.

10. Learned Senior Counsel has next argued that there is no forensic analysis of the said suicide note to verify whether the said suicide note was in the handwriting of the deceased person. It is further argued that as far as the applicant is concerned, he was posted at Shahjahanpur and the occurrence is of Etawah which is far away from the place of occurrence. It is further stated that there are 24 bighas of land in the name of father of the applicant, as such there was no question for the applicant or his family members for demanding a plot in dowry.

11. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that father of the applicant had given the information to the family of the informant as bonafide act, as such the applicant is entitled for bail. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.06.2024. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF INFORMANT / A.G.A. :

12. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail on the ground that the inquest report was prepared and it was mentioned that the informant was told that his daughter has committed suicide. The cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging.

13. Learned counsel for the informant has placed reliance on the same suicide note which indicates in its later part that the marriage was solemnized seeing property of the deceased and she was being pressurized every now and then, as such she has been forced to commit suicide. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the averment of sister of the deceased person Jyoti, who has categorically stated that there was demand of a plot from the deceased person and the said demand was made on 01.06.2024 i.e one day prior to the incident which comes within the category of 'soon before her death', as such ingredients of Section 304-B IPC are fulfilled. CONCLUSION :

14. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is the husband of the deceased person and the demand of dowry was made one day prior to her death and there being a suicide note indicating complicity of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.

15. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.

16. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

17. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad