Dismissed¶14

Subhash v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2025BAIL/14830/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Court No. 65; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 14830 of 2025; Subhash v. State of U.P.; bail application rejected (dismissed); dowry death; Sections 498A, 304B IPC; 3/4 D.P. Act; Case Crime No. 0089 of 2020; Police Station Govind Nagar, District Mathura; prompt FIR; death within precincts of applicant's house; cause of death Asphyxia due to ante-mortem strangulation; applicant in custody since 19.03.2020; four witnesses examined; counsel Ashok Kumar Chaubey; State Law Officer Ifra Islam; Justice Krishan Pahal; order date 16.7.2025; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:115297.

What did the court decide?

In deciding the bail application, the court took into consideration the fact that the FIR was prompt and that the deceased died within the precincts of the house of the applicant. ¶14

Subhash Vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115297

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14830 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Subhash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Chaubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Chaubey, learned counsel for the applicant, as well as Ms. Ifra Islam, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0089 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police StationGovind Nagar, District-Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites six years ago, and subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the victim to cruelty for demand of Rs. 2,00,000/- as dowry, thereby leading her to death on 17.03.2020.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The trial is moving at snail's pace as only four witnesses have been examined till date, as such, there is no likelihood of conviction of trial in near future.

¶11

It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.03.2020 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that already four witnesses have been examined and only formal witnesses remain to be examined.

¶13

Cause of death is Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem strangulation, as such, applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶14

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that FIR is prompt, the deceased died within the precincts of the house of the applicant coupled with the fact that cause of death is Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem strangulation, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶15

The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected .

¶16

Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Karan

¶17

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subhash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases