Rajesh vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78725

Court No. - 71

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2572 of 2025

Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bachan Singh,Vimal Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant-accused, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant-accused in Case Crime No. 300 of 2020, under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 201 of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Kotwali Hata, District - Kushi Nagar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant-accused on bail.

¶8

The first bail application of applicant was rejected for want of prosecution by this Court vide order dated 22.03.2024.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is husband of deceased and their marriage has taken place in the year 2014. Out of that marriage, they have two girl child. The allegation of dowry demand and harassment of deceased made against the applicants are wholly false. At the time of incident, a period of six and a half years has already passed since the marriage. Learned counsel submitted that the deceased was suffering from illness and she has died of illness. The burn injuries shown on the body of the deceased were suffered while she was being cremated by the complainant and his family members. In post mortem report, cause of death could not be ascertained, hence, viscera was preserved and thus, it is clear that the deceased has not

¶10

died to burn injuries. The viscera report is yet to be received. It is further submitted that the two daughters of applicant and deceased are being looked after by parents of applicant. The applicant is in jail since 11.08.2020 and thus, he has already undergone detention of about four years and ten months. All the material witnesses have been examined before the trial court and thus, there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. The trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and considering the future of two minor daughters of applicant, he may be released on bail. It was stated that in case the applicant is granted bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during trial.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is husband of deceased and that there are allegations that deceased was harassed by the applicant on account of dowry and she has suffered unnatural death within a period of seven years of her marriage.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and all attending facts, particularly period of detention and keeping in view the future of two minor daughters of applicant, without expressing any opinion on the merits, a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant-accused - Rajesh, involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶14

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

¶15

(ii) The applicant-accused shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant-accused shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant-accused shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶18

(v) The applicant-accused 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant-accused in accordance with law.

¶20

Order Date :- 13.5.2025 Rama Kant

¶21

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

Rajesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh 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

Yuvraj Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. and Another

Komil Prasad vs State of U.P. and Another

Alok Daksh vs State of U.P. and Another

Anand Singh vs State of U.P.

Bhawna Singh and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Rajendra Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. and Another