High Court · 2025

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that at the initial stage, the first information report was lodged against the husband including the other family members, whereas the chargesheet has been filed against the applicant only. He next added that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized on 30-04-2021 and the incident has taken place after about three and half years of the marriage. He submits that the applicant and his wife were living in harmonious atmosphere and there is a child of 3-4 months from their wedlock. He next submits that there is no evidence that there was any demand of dowry and there is also no evidence that the deceased was subjected to cruelty. He submits that the statement of P.W.-1, has been deposed before the learned trial court, wherein he has denied the allegation of demand of dowry and he also stated that his daughter was suffering with mental stress and she has hanged herself. He added that there is no anti-mortem injuries over the body of the deceased, as is evident from the post-mortem report and further there is no ample evidence against the applicant that he was involved in committing the offence. Further argued that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he has one case criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 31-08-2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Therefore, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits the applicant is named in the first information report and there are serious allegations against him that he has committed offence and after thorough investigation, the chargesheet has been filed against him and such, the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that there is no anti-mortem injury over the body of the deceased and further P.W.-1 did not support the story of the prosecution and he has admitted the fact fairly that the daughter of P.W.-1 was under acute mental stress and because of that, she has hanged herself. This court has also noticed the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 31-08-2024 coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Narendra Shukla @ Pinku, involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that at the initial stage, the first information report was lodged against the husband including the other family members, whereas the chargesheet has been filed against the applicant only. He next added that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized on 30-04-2021 and the incident has taken place after about three and half years of the marriage. He submits that the applicant and his wife were living in harmonious atmosphere and there is a child of 3-4 months from their wedlock. He next submits that there is no evidence that there was any demand of dowry and there is also no evidence that the deceased was subjected to cruelty. He submits that the statement of P.W.-1, has been deposed before the learned trial court, wherein he has denied the allegation of demand of dowry and he also stated that his daughter was suffering with mental stress and she has hanged herself. He added that there is no anti-mortem injuries over the body of the deceased, as is evident from the post-mortem report and further there is no ample evidence against the applicant that he was involved in committing the offence. Further argued that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he has one case criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 31-08-2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Therefore, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits the applicant is named in the first information report and there are serious allegations against him that he has committed offence and after thorough investigation, the chargesheet has been filed against him and such, the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that there is no anti-mortem injury over the body of the deceased and further P.W.-1 did not support the story of the prosecution and he has admitted the fact fairly that the daughter of P.W.-1 was under acute mental stress and because of that, she has hanged herself. This court has also noticed the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 31-08-2024 coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. Let the applicant-Narendra Shukla @ Pinku, involved in the aforementioned 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, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; (4) 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. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 AKS ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench