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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, in custody since 01.08.2021 with his trial not yet concluded (though at an advanced stage with all prosecution witnesses examined), should be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial in Case Crime No. 246 of 2020 under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.

Court's answer

It is not in dispute that the trial of the applicant is at the advanced stage and all prosecution witnesses have been examined; the court finds no good ground to release the applicant on bail, in the light of the Apex Court judgment in X vs. State of Rajasthan and Another (2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539) that bail should not be granted in heinous offences once the trial has started.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is rejected.

Key takeaways

Observations in the order are confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial.obiter¶13
Considering the detention period, the trial court is directed to endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournments to either party; copy of the order to be sent to the trial court within three days for information and compliance.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh, J.; neutral citation 2025:AHC:40595; order dated 20.3.2025) rejects the third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. of applicant Monu Alias Shrawan, involved in Case Crime No. 246 of 2020, Police Station Husainganj, District Fatehpur, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. His two earlier bail applications had been rejected on 03.03.2023 and 16.05.2024 (Crl. Misc. Bail Application Nos. 229 of 2022 and 40342 of 2023). Although the applicant is in custody since 01.08.2021, the trial is at an advanced stage with all prosecution witnesses examined; relying on the Apex Court decision in X vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539 (bail should not be granted in heinous offences where the trial has started), the court finds no good ground for bail and rejects the application. Observations are confined to the bail issue and do not affect trial merits; the trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments, with a copy of the order to reach it within three days.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40595

Court No. - 78

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2810 of 2025

Applicant :- Monu Alias Shrawan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Javed Akhter Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

1-Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record.

2-By means of this third bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant-Monu Alias Shrawan who is involved in Case Crime No. 246 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Husainganj, District Fatehpur seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

3-First and second bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide orders dated 03.03.2023 and 16.05.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 229 of 2022 and 40342 of 2023 respectively.

4-The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.08.2021 but till date, his trial has not been concluded, therefore, considering the detention period of the applicant, he may be enlarged on bail.

5-On the other hand, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submission of learned counsel for the applicant by contending that in this case, all the prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial court and the trial of the applicant is at the advanced stage. Considering the gravity of the offence, bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected.

6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that the trial of the applicant is at the advanced stage and all the prosecution witnesses have been examined. I do not find any good ground to release the applicant on bail in the light of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of X vs. State of Rajasthan and Another , 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539, wherein, it has been held that if the trial of the accused has started, his bail should not be granted in heinous offences.

7-Accordingly, the bail application is rejected .

8-It is made clear that the observation contained in the instant order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial.

9-However considering the detention period of the applicant, the trial court is directed to make an endeavour to conclude the trial of the applicant, expeditiously, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

10-Copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial court within three days' for information and compliance.

Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Saurabh

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