Ravi vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88711

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11917 of 2025

Applicant :- Ravi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jay Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Jay Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0253 of 2024, under Sections 108 BNS, Police Station Pallavpuram, District Meerut, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is husband of the deceased and initially FIR of the present case was lodged under section 103(1) BNS and other sections with the allegation that marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased and after marriage, he used to torture her alongwith his family members for want of dowry and also tortured her due to the reason that in spite of several years of marriage, she could not deliver a child and due to above reason on 19.7.2024, they have committed her murder but during investigation when it was found that actually wife of the applicant, committed suicide then case was converted under section 108 BNS.

¶9

He further submitted that entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false and deceased committed suicide only because even after nine years of her marriage, she could not conceive.

¶10

He further submitted that there is no cogent evidence on record which can suggest that due to the abetment of applicant, deceased committed suicide.

¶11

He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 4.3.2025.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

However, as per prosecution, due to the torture and harassment of the applicant and his family members, his wife committed suicide but it reflects, FIR of the present case was lodged through an application under section 173 (4) BNSS and even application under section 173 (4) BNSS was moved after about six weeks.

¶15

Further, considering the contents of the FIR, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that as even after 9 years of her marriage, deceased could not conceive therefore, she committed suicide cannot be ruled out, at this stage.

¶16

Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 4.3.2025.

¶17

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant- Ravi, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶25

Order Date :- 26.5.2025

¶26

Ankita

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi 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

Jagdeesh vs State of U.P.

Ramakant Yadav Alias Mintu vs State of U.P.

Durgesh Nishad vs State of U.P. and Another

Surendra Singh Tomar vs State of U.P.

Ram Sabad and 2 Others vs State of U.P.

Hardev Patel vs State of U.P.