Allowed¶16

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Jul 2025BAIL/20391/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ajay Kumar bail allowed — Allahabad High Court, Krishan Pahal J., 3.7.2025 — Criminal Misc. Bail Application 20391 of 2025 — Case Crime No. 265/2024, PS Eka, Firozabad — 498A, 323, 304B, 120B IPC; 3/4 D.P. Act — dowry death; FIR delayed ~6 months; S.156(3) application 26.02.2024; closure report; S.306 IPC FIR Crime No. 67/2024; charge-sheet after further investigation; asphyxia ante-mortem hanging; in jail since 17.01.2025; personal bond + two sureties; 2025:AHC:103218.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Ajay Kumar ordered to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order, subject to the three stated conditions. ¶16

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Ajay Kumar, booked in Case Crime No. 265 of 2024 (PS Eka, District Firozabad) under Sections 498A, 323, 304B, 120B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, is entitled to be released on bail during pendency of trial.

¶8

Court's answer

Taking into account the submissions and evidence on record, the Court concluded the applicant has made out a case for bail and allowed the bail application.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

The decision expressly weighed the delay in institution of the FIR and the cause of death being asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, while withholding any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶9

Key takeaways

Bail is conditional: the applicant shall not tamper with evidence, shall not pressurise/intimidate prosecution witnesses, and shall appear before the trial court on dates fixed; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.ratio¶20
Observations made in granting bail shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of witnesses.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT (Krishan Pahal, J.) — Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 20391 of 2025, decided 3.7.2025 (Neutral Cit. 2025:AHC:103218): Bail ALLOWED to applicant Ajay Kumar in Case Crime No. 265 of 2024, PS Eka, District Firozabad, under Ss. 498A, 323, 304B, 120B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, during pendency of trial. Grounds weighed: FIR delayed about six months; application under S. 156(3) Cr.P.C. moved 26.02.2024 after a six-day delay, with counsel asserting non-compliance with S. 154(3) Cr.P.C.; closure report earlier filed (deceased's brother-in-law allegedly held an indecent video; S. 306 I.P.C. FIR Crime No. 67 of 2024 against him), charge-sheet submitted after police-directed further investigation; cause of death recorded as asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. Counsel for applicant (Ms. Pratibha Singh) pleaded false implication, no criminal history and custody since 17.01.2025. Released on personal bond and two sureties each in like amount, subject to conditions (no tampering with evidence; no pressure/intimidation of witnesses; appearance on dates fixed), breach being a ground for cancellation. Court expressly refrained from expressing opinion on merits; its observations are not to affect the trial Judge's independent assessment.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:103218

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20391 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Pratibha Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Ms. Pratibha Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.265 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 323, 304B, 120B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Eka, District Firozabad, 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 on 07.05.2017 and subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry of Rs.5 lakhs and a motorcycle, thereby led her to death on 20.02.2024.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about six months and even the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved after a delay of six days i.e. 26.02.2024 and there is no compliance of Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. as no application has been moved before the Superintendent of Police.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the closure report was filed in the instant case as the brother-in-law of the deceased was having an indecent video of her in a compromising state and an FIR under Section 306 I.P.C. was instituted against him which was entered as Crime No.67 of 2024 at the police station, but after intervention of the police authorities, the case was sent for further investigation and the final report

¶12

(charge-sheet) has been submitted against the applicant and other family members.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has also stated that it is a clear-cut case of false implication. The cause of death was found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The deceased has committed suicide due to apprehension in her mind that the said video may be made viral by her brother-in-law. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.01.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR and the fact that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Ajay Kumar , who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶17

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

¶18

(ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶19

(iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

Order Date :- 3.7.2025

¶23

(Ravi Kant)

¶24

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar 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