High Court · 2025

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 124 of 2024 under sections 498-A and 304-B of IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.S.- Kudwar District - Sultanpur. As per the prosecution story, the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the applicant on 5.5.2024 and after the vidai ceremony, the applicant including the other family members allegedly started demanding dowry and once the same was not fulfilled, the deceased has been hanged to death. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that there was no question arises for demand of dowry after 2 or 3 days of marriage. He also submitted that the applicant himself had informed with respect to the alleged incident to the family members of the deceased and even the applicant and his family members were present at the time of panchnama. He also added that the postmortem report reveals that the death is caused due to antemortem hanging and there is no antemortem injury over the body of the deceased. Next submission is that the complainant has failed to substantiate any of the evidence oral or written that the applicant or his family members had ever demanded dowry. He also submits that there was no any criminal intent of the applicant to commit the offence and it is mishappening only. Further submission is that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed thus, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses coupled with the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 20 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 04.07.2024 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. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is husband and death is occurred in the matrimonial house and that too is in unnatural conditions as postmortem report is enough to show that the death is occurred due to hanging. Further submission is that the chargesheet has been filed as the applicant was found involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the that the postmortem report reveals that the death is occurred due to hanging and there is no antemortem injury over the body of the deceased. This Court has noticed that the applicant and the family members themselves had informed the family members of the deceased regarding death and they were present all the time with the dead body as is evident from the panchnama. Further the applicant has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and chargesheet has been filed; the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 20 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 04.07.2024 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. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, 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- Shani Kumar 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 sufficient 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.; and (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 :- 25.7.2025 Mayank MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 124 of 2024 under sections 498-A and 304-B of IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.S.- Kudwar District - Sultanpur. As per the prosecution story, the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with the applicant on 5.5.2024 and after the vidai ceremony, the applicant including the other family members allegedly started demanding dowry and once the same was not fulfilled, the deceased has been hanged to death. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that there was no question arises for demand of dowry after 2 or 3 days of marriage. He also submitted that the applicant himself had informed with respect to the alleged incident to the family members of the deceased and even the applicant and his family members were present at the time of panchnama. He also added that the postmortem report reveals that the death is caused due to antemortem hanging and there is no antemortem injury over the body of the deceased. Next submission is that the complainant has failed to substantiate any of the evidence oral or written that the applicant or his family members had ever demanded dowry. He also submits that there was no any criminal intent of the applicant to commit the offence and it is mishappening only. Further submission is that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and the chargesheet has been filed thus, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses coupled with the fact that the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 20 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 04.07.2024 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. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that the applicant is husband and death is occurred in the matrimonial house and that too is in unnatural conditions as postmortem report is enough to show that the death is occurred due to hanging. Further submission is that the chargesheet has been filed as the applicant was found involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the that the postmortem report reveals that the death is occurred due to hanging and there is no antemortem injury over the body of the deceased. This Court has noticed that the applicant and the family members themselves had informed the family members of the deceased regarding death and they were present all the time with the dead body as is evident from the panchnama. Further the applicant has cooperated in the investigation proceedings and chargesheet has been filed; the applicant has no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 20 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 04.07.2024 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. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, 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- Shani Kumar 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 sufficient 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.; and (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 :- 25.7.2025 Mayank MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench