Ravi Alias Ravendra Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70871

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10649 of 2025

Applicant :- Ravi Alias Ravendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amrita Verma,Gaurav Khare,Hemendra Gautam,Rashtrapati Khare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Rashtrapati Khare, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has produced the photocopy of the viscera report before the Court which is taken in record.

¶9

Learned counsel for the State submits that he has received instructions in the matter for which time was granted to him on 02.04.2025.

¶10

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Ravi @ Ravendra , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 155 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80 B.N.S. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali Sahpau, District Hathras.

¶11

The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 29.09.2024 by Shankar Lal against the applicant and 04 other persons alleging therein that the marriage of his daughter Leena was solemnized with the applicant on 03.12.2023 in which he had spent about Rs. 50 lakhs wherein he had given a vehicle, gold & diamond jewellery, cash and gifts. After marriage the accused persons were demanding Rs. 20 lakhs as additional dowry for construction of house. They used to torture and harass his daughter and used to keep her hungry. There was repeated times demand of the said money. On 29.09.2024 in the morning he received an information that his daughter has died. A report be lodged and action be taken.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant argued 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 was found to have received a ligature mark and one abrasion of size 4 cm x 0.1 cm on the left side chest but the cause of the death of the deceased was not ascertained and viscera was preserved. It is submitted that in

¶13

the viscera report dated 20.02.2025 no chemical poison was found. It is submitted that the cause of the death of the deceased was the ligature mark found on her body and the linear abrasion was of very small dimension without any internal injury as per the postmortem examination report. It is further submitted that trial in the present matter has started in which Shankar Lal the first informant was examined as P.W.-1 who although in his examination-in-chief supported the prosecution case but in his cross-examination stated that there was no demand of dowry and his daughter was a person of cranky nature and since she was educated but was not having any employment and thus she was living in depression and used to keep angry for small things. It is next submitted that the said witness was further summoned for reexamination by the prosecution in which also he denied the prosecution story and stated that there was never any demand of dowry. It is submitted that Smt. Chandrawati the mother of the deceased was examined as P.W.-2 who did not support the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. It is further submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge-sheet has been submitted only against the applicant whereas the other four co-accused being the mother-in-law, 03 jeth of the deceased were exonerated. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 25 of the affidavit and is in jail since 06.10.2024.

¶14

Per contra , learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. He is named in the first information report and there are allegations against him.

¶15

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the cause of death was not ascertained in the postmortem examination despite the deceased having being found to have received a ligature mark and one linear abrasion. Linear abrasion was a very small dimension. In the viscera report no chemical poison was found. The trial in the matter has started in which although the first informant initially has supported the prosecution case but in his crossexamination stated that there was no demand of dowry. Smt. Chandrawati the mother of the deceased was examined as P.W.-2 who has also not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile.

¶16

10 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.

¶17

Let the applicant- Ravi @ Ravendra , 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:-

¶18

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶19

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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

(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.

¶23

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶24

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.

¶25

The bail application is allowed .

¶26

Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶27

Order Date :- 5.5.2025 AS Rathore

¶28

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravi Alias Ravendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Alias Ravendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases