Rajiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

Rajiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Rajiv Kumar to be released on bail in the aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: (a) executing a bond to undertake to attend hearings; (b) not committing any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected; and (c) not directly or indirectly making any inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure of facts to the Court or police officer or tamper with evidence.

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused-applicant Rajiv Kumar is entitled to be released on bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 236 of 2024 (section 85, 80(2) BNS and section 3/4 DP Act, P. S. Maigalganj, District Kheri).

Court's answer

Considering the facts before it (per the doctor's report death occurred on account of falling from stairs; the mother-in-law and father-in-law co-accused were already enlarged on bail) coupled with the applicant being in custody since 14.09.2024 and having no criminal history, the Court held the applicant entitled to bail and allowed the bail application.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 12 — Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 146 of 2025, decided October 10, 2025 by Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia, J. Applicant Rajiv Kumar (counsel: Janendra Kumar Verma) sought bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 236 of 2024 under section 85, 80(2) BNS and section 3/4 DP Act, P. S. Maigalganj, District Kheri (State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home as Opposite Party; G.A.). Per FIR allegations, the informant's daughter, married to the applicant around three years ago, was killed, with the postmortem reporting the cause of death as antemortem injuries. Counsel submitted that even the doctor's report stated she died on account of falling from stairs, and that two co-accused — the mother-in-law and father-in-law — had already been enlarged on bail. Considering these facts coupled with custody since 14.09.2024 and absence of criminal history, the Court deemed the applicant entitled to bail and allowed the application. Release ordered on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, with undertakings to attend hearings, refrain from similar offences, and abstain from inducement, threat or promise or tampering with evidence.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 146 of 2025

Rajiv Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

.....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Janendra Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 12

HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR/Case Crime No.236 of 2024 under section 85, 80(2) BNS and section 3/4 DP Act, P. S. Maigalganj, District Kheri.

In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was married to the applicant around three years ago. Subsequently, she was killed. The cause of death as per the postmortem report is antemortem injuries.

The submission of the counsel for the applicant is that even in the report of the doctor, it has been stated that she died on account of falling from stairs. Two co-accused have been enlarged on bail, who are the mother in law and father in law.

Considering these facts coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 14.09.2024 and has no criminal history is entitled for the bail. Thus the bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant Rajiv Kumar be released on bail in aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

BAIL No. 146 of 2025

2

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(Pankaj Bhatia,J.)

October 10, 2025

VNP/-

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench