High Court · 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 287 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 85, 110, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kaisarganj, District Bahraich.

3. As per the prosecution story, the complainant was married to one Noor Ali on 14.07.2022 and the demand of dowry of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) was made, failing which, she was subjected to cruelty and thereafter, she was admitted in J.S. Hospital, Bahraich, wherein she gave birth to a child.

4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant no.1 is mother-in-law, the applicant no.2 is Jeth and the applicant no.3 is Jethani in the instant matter. He added that the applicants never demanded any dowry and the complainant was never subjected to cruelty. He next added that the complainant and the applicants were living happily and due to certain anonymity, the first information report has been lodged. He also added that because of mishappening as it was raining and the complainant slipped and received injuries on her head. The husband of the complainant took the complainant to the hospital and also informed the parents of the complainant, whereafter the father of the complainant reached to the hospital. He submits that during the admission in the hospital, she gave birth to a child on 16-08-2024. He next submits that in fact that the delivery was normal as is evident from the statement of the doctor, who examined the complainant.

5. He has also drawn attention of this court towards Annexure No. 5 of the bail application, which is the statement of the doctor and submitted that when the complainant was questioned regarding the reason of death, the doctor answered that the same did not happen due to any kind of injury and that was with reason to 'STILL BIRTH'. He also submits that there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to commit offence and investigation is going on and the applicants are cooperating in the same. Next submission is that the case criminal history of the applicants have been explained in the supplementary affidavit and they are languishing in jail since 13.05.2025. Further submitted that the applicants undertake that in case, they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that there are serious allegations against the applicants and as such, they are not entitled for any relief.

7. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicants are languishing in jail since 13.05.2025; case criminal history of the applicants have been explained coupled with the fact that they have undertaken that if they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

8. 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.

9. Let the applicants Hazara Begaum, Naseeb Ali and Rukaiah Begaum involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. They shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A IPC (Now Section 269 BNS); (3) The applicants 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. (Now Section 351 BNSS); and (4) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (Now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (Now Section 209 BNS). 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 :- 27.6.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 287 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 85, 110, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kaisarganj, District Bahraich.

3. As per the prosecution story, the complainant was married to one Noor Ali on 14.07.2022 and the demand of dowry of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) was made, failing which, she was subjected to cruelty and thereafter, she was admitted in J.S. Hospital, Bahraich, wherein she gave birth to a child.

4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicant no.1 is mother-in-law, the applicant no.2 is Jeth and the applicant no.3 is Jethani in the instant matter. He added that the applicants never demanded any dowry and the complainant was never subjected to cruelty. He next added that the complainant and the applicants were living happily and due to certain anonymity, the first information report has been lodged. He also added that because of mishappening as it was raining and the complainant slipped and received injuries on her head. The husband of the complainant took the complainant to the hospital and also informed the parents of the complainant, whereafter the father of the complainant reached to the hospital. He submits that during the admission in the hospital, she gave birth to a child on 16-08-2024. He next submits that in fact that the delivery was normal as is evident from the statement of the doctor, who examined the complainant.

5. He has also drawn attention of this court towards Annexure No. 5 of the bail application, which is the statement of the doctor and submitted that when the complainant was questioned regarding the reason of death, the doctor answered that the same did not happen due to any kind of injury and that was with reason to 'STILL BIRTH'. He also submits that there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to commit offence and investigation is going on and the applicants are cooperating in the same. Next submission is that the case criminal history of the applicants have been explained in the supplementary affidavit and they are languishing in jail since 13.05.2025. Further submitted that the applicants undertake that in case, they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that there are serious allegations against the applicants and as such, they are not entitled for any relief.

7. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicants are languishing in jail since 13.05.2025; case criminal history of the applicants have been explained coupled with the fact that they have undertaken that if they are granted bail, they will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

8. 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.

9. Let the applicants Hazara Begaum, Naseeb Ali and Rukaiah Begaum involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. They shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A IPC (Now Section 269 BNS); (3) The applicants 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. (Now Section 351 BNSS); and (4) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (Now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (Now Section 209 BNS). 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 :- 27.6.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench