Allowed

Prem Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Allahabad HC10 Apr 2025BAIL/3065/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 85 and 80(2) BNS in a case of alleged dowry death by hanging. Court noted delay of three days in lodging FIR, postmortem findings not supporting the beating allegation, exoneration of one co-accused, bail to another, no criminal history, and concluded investigation, and allowed bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, with conditions not to tamper with evidence or pressurise witnesses and to appear on all dates fixed by the trial court.

Prem Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20286

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3065 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Prem Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Hemant Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, as well as Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.0381 of 2024, under Sections 85 and 80(2) B.N.S., registered at Police Station Kotwali Bikapur, District Ayodhya.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 21.10.2024 at 16:41 hours against the applicant, his mother and brother, stating that the informant had got his daughter married to the applicant about five years ago; that all the accused persons used to harass her for demanding dowry; that she has a son, aged three years and that all the accused persons killed her and hanged her dead-body at 10:30 a.m. on 18.10.2024.

¶9

Postmortem examination report mentions a ligature mark around neck of the dead-body and cause of death has been opined to be asphyxia due to antemortem hanging.

¶10

Investigating officer recorded statements of informant and his

¶11

father and both of them have supported the FIR version.

¶12

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it has been stated that the applicant has no criminal history and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶13

The learned Additional Government Advocate has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that allegations against the applicant and his mother- Kanchan have been established during investigation and charge-sheet has been submitted against them. The allegations against the applicant's brother- Susheel could not be established and he has been exonerated.

¶14

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the incident took place on 18.10.2024 at 10.30 a.m., whereas the FIR has been lodged after three days on 21.10.2024 at 16:41 hours; the FIR alleges that the victim had been beaten up and killed, however, this allegation is not supported by findings of the postmortem examination report; that similar allegations had been levelled against three persons, one of whom has been exonerated and other has been granted bail by the trial Court; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 23.10.2024, whereas the investigation already stands concluded, I am of the view that a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail is made out.

¶15

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Prem Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶17

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶18

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶19

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 10.4.2025 MVS/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Prem Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tasneem Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and 3 Others

Sunil Kumar Chaubey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Mo. Shahid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko