Sajan @ Ram Sanehi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46525

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1631 of 2025

Applicant :- Sajan @ Ram Sanehi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the complainant married his daughter with the applicant on 26.4.2024. It is alleged that the named accused persons used to commit cruelty upon her in relation to demand of dowry of Rs. 3 lakhs. Due to not paying the said amount, they have killed her on 20.9.2024.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that general allegation has been levelled in the prosecution case. There is no material to show that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her death relating to demand of dowry. As per postmortem report, cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Except ligature mark, there is no other antemortem injury. It is submitted that the PW-1 in his chief examination has reiterated the version of the FIR. However, during the cross-examination, he has stated that the deceased never told him about demand of dowry and she had committed suicide according to her own will. The accused is not responsible. Further, PW-2, mother of the deceased has been declared hostile.

¶10

It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 11.10.2024. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant.

¶12

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the statement of PW-1 and PW-2, general nature of allegations levelled in the prosecution case so also the fact that

¶13

there is no material so show that the deceased was subjected to cruelty relating to demand of dowry; the applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 11.10.2024 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant- Sajan @ Ram Sanehi involved in Case Crime No. 476 of 2024, under Sections 80(2), 85 of B.N.S. & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nanpara, District- Bahraich, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶18

(iii) 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.

¶19

(iv) 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. 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.

¶20

(v) The applicant 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 in accordance with law.

¶21

(vi) 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. is issued and the 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 of B.N.S.

¶22

Order Date :- 8.8.2025 Shravan

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sajan @ Ram Sanehi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajan @ Ram Sanehi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

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

Monu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vipul Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Nisar Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.

Karan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sajan @ Ram Sanehi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Pravesh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.