State of U.P v. Party

2. Heard Sri Rajiv Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Amit Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 122 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Lanka, District Varanasi.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on

10.04.2025 by Rajnath Yadav against the applicant, mother-in-law and Sunil Yadav alleging therein that the marriage of his daughter Pooja Yadav was solemnized with Amit Yadav the applicant on 06.12.2020 in which he had spent money around Rs. Ten lakhs and had given gold ornaments and motorcycle but the accused persons were not happy with it and there was demand that he may sell his land and give them Rs. Fifty Lakh for construction of the house. They used to torture and assault her and keep her hungry. Many times panchayat was called but the accused persons did not stop their torture. On 10.04.2025 the accused persons due to non-fulfillment of 2 BAIL No. 37364 of 2025 dowry murdered his daughter.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, the doctor found a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, however, viscera was preserved but the cause of death was conclusive. It is submitted that the doctor did not find any other bodily injury on the body of the deceased. It is further submitted that trial in the present matter has started in which the first informant Rajnath Yadav has been examined as P.W.-1, Arvind Kumar Yadav has been examined as P.W.-2, Gopi Yadav has been examined as P.W.-3, Smt. Samdei has been examined as P.W.-4, Dasrath Yadav has been examined as P.W.-5 and Rajeev Kumar Yadav has been examined as P.W.-6 amongst whom P.W.s 2, 3, 4, & 6 are witnesses of inquest whereas P.W.-5 is the scribe of the first information report. It is submitted that P.W.-1 Rajnath Yadav is the first informant. It is further submitted that except for Dasrath Yadav P.W.-5 who is the scribe of the first information report the other 05 witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. It is submitted that Smt. Chandrawati Devi the mother-in-law of the deceased has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 B.N.S.S. No. 3801 of 2025. It is further submitted that Suneel Yadav the brother-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19493 of 2025, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit. It is submitted that five prosecution witnesses including the first informant who is the father of the deceased, Smt. Samdei the mother of the deceased, Arvind Yadav & Gopi Yadav the brothers of the deceased have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile and as such there is no credible evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 33 of the affidavit and is in jail since 12.04.2025. 3 BAIL No. 37364 of 2025

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments as raised.

7. Learned counsel for the first informant although is present but he did not dispute the arguments as raised by learned counsel for the applicant particularly with regard to the fact of five prosecution witnesses not supporting the prosecution case and have been declared hostile.

8. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but the deceased was found to have received a single ligature mark and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Six prosecution witnesses have been examined out of which five witnesses namely Rajnath Yadav, Arvind Kumar Yadav, Gopi Yadav, Smt. Samdei and Dasrath Yadav have been declared hostile by the trial court.

9. 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.

10. Let the applicant- Amit Yadav, 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. 4 BAIL No. 37364 of 2025 (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 B.N.S.S., 2023 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 209 B.N.S., 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 B.N.S.S., 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 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. 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.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. October 29, 2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.)

2. Heard Sri Rajiv Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Amit Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 122 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352 B.N.S. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Lanka, District Varanasi.

4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on

10.04.2025 by Rajnath Yadav against the applicant, mother-in-law and Sunil Yadav alleging therein that the marriage of his daughter Pooja Yadav was solemnized with Amit Yadav the applicant on 06.12.2020 in which he had spent money around Rs. Ten lakhs and had given gold ornaments and motorcycle but the accused persons were not happy with it and there was demand that he may sell his land and give them Rs. Fifty Lakh for construction of the house. They used to torture and assault her and keep her hungry. Many times panchayat was called but the accused persons did not stop their torture. On 10.04.2025 the accused persons due to non-fulfillment of 2 BAIL No. 37364 of 2025 dowry murdered his daughter.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, the doctor found a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, however, viscera was preserved but the cause of death was conclusive. It is submitted that the doctor did not find any other bodily injury on the body of the deceased. It is further submitted that trial in the present matter has started in which the first informant Rajnath Yadav has been examined as P.W.-1, Arvind Kumar Yadav has been examined as P.W.-2, Gopi Yadav has been examined as P.W.-3, Smt. Samdei has been examined as P.W.-4, Dasrath Yadav has been examined as P.W.-5 and Rajeev Kumar Yadav has been examined as P.W.-6 amongst whom P.W.s 2, 3, 4, & 6 are witnesses of inquest whereas P.W.-5 is the scribe of the first information report. It is submitted that P.W.-1 Rajnath Yadav is the first informant. It is further submitted that except for Dasrath Yadav P.W.-5 who is the scribe of the first information report the other 05 witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. It is submitted that Smt. Chandrawati Devi the mother-in-law of the deceased has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.05.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 B.N.S.S. No. 3801 of 2025. It is further submitted that Suneel Yadav the brother-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.06.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 19493 of 2025, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit. It is submitted that five prosecution witnesses including the first informant who is the father of the deceased, Smt. Samdei the mother of the deceased, Arvind Yadav & Gopi Yadav the brothers of the deceased have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile and as such there is no credible evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 33 of the affidavit and is in jail since 12.04.2025. 3 BAIL No. 37364 of 2025

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments as raised.

7. Learned counsel for the first informant although is present but he did not dispute the arguments as raised by learned counsel for the applicant particularly with regard to the fact of five prosecution witnesses not supporting the prosecution case and have been declared hostile.

8. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but the deceased was found to have received a single ligature mark and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Six prosecution witnesses have been examined out of which five witnesses namely Rajnath Yadav, Arvind Kumar Yadav, Gopi Yadav, Smt. Samdei and Dasrath Yadav have been declared hostile by the trial court.

9. 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.

10. Let the applicant- Amit Yadav, 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. 4 BAIL No. 37364 of 2025 (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 B.N.S.S., 2023 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 209 B.N.S., 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 B.N.S.S., 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 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

11. 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.

12. The bail application is allowed.

13. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. October 29, 2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.)