Uttam Singh Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32567

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3171 of 2025

Applicant :- Uttam Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishnu Kant Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

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

¶7

By means of this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant Uttam Singh, who is involved in Case Crime No. 246 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 316 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Kotwali Orai, district Jalaun seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution case, in brief, complainant Sipahi Lal, who is father of the deceased Sangam, lodged the first information report on 11.04.2024 for the offence under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against Uttam Singh, Arjun Singh, Raja Singh and Priya, who are husband, father-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased respectively making allegation inter alia of harassment and torture of his daughter (deceased) in her matrimonial home by her in-laws and in the first information report, it is specific case of the complainant that on account of non-fulfillment of additional demand of dowry, his daughter's in-laws were not satisfied and tortured her daughter adopting different modus operandi and in the said background of the fact on 10.04.2024, she was done to death in her matrimonial home.

¶9

Main substratum of arguments of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is husband of deceased and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is also pointed out that in the first information report dated 11.04.2024, Arjun Singh

¶10

(father of the applicant) was also made accused whereas he had already died in the year 2016. After culmination of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted only against the present applicant. Much emphasis has been given by contending that though the complainant had made allegation of demand of dowry as well as harassment and torture of his daughter in the first information report but when he was examined as PW-1, he has not supported the prosecution case in his examination-in-chief and accordingly, he has been declared hostile and similarly Veer Bahadur, who is elder brother of the deceased, has been examined as PW-2 but he has also not supported the prosecution case and he has also been declared hostile, therefore, there is bleak chance of conviction of the applicant, who does not have any criminal history to his credit. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.04.2024 and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that first information report of this case was lodged on 11.04.2024 whereas statement of the complainant was recorded after a considerable delay on 19.10.2024, therefore, possibility of winning over the prosecution witnesses from the side of the accusedapplicant cannot be ruled out.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that both the complainant and his son did not make allegation of demand of dowry against the applicant before trial Court and they had denied the incident in the manner as indicated in the first information report.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties as noted above,

¶14

this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Uttam Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶17

(ii) That 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.

¶18

(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶19

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Shubham

¶22

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

Uttam Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uttam Singh 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