Suraj vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38427 of 2025

Suraj .....Applicant(s) Versus State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anurodh Tripathi, Pulak Ganguly Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Court No. - 66

¶4

HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Pulak Ganguly, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Triveni Sharan Rai, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Suraj , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 17 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2) B.N.S. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra.

¶8

The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 19.01.2025 by Rajendra Singh against the applicant and 02 other persons alleging therein that the marriage of his daughter Rajni was solemnized in the year 2020 with Sooraj (the present applicant). After marriage the accused persons were living with his daughter in Obera and after some days of marriage the accused persons demand Rs. Three lakh as dowry from her and used to quarrel with her and torture her. On 18/19-01-2025 in the night his daughter committed suicide and died. He has a belief that the accused persons have murdered his daughter and are falsely showing it as a suicide. The dead body of his daughter is lying in Obera. A report be lodged and action be taken.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the

¶10

BAIL No. 38427 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, a single ligature mark was found on her body and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. It is submitted that the first information report states that the deceased committed suicide and thus the factum of the applicant and other accused being involved in the present matter is false. While placing paragraph 17 of the affidavit it is submitted that the deceased committed suicide as even after five years of marriage she could not bear a child and thus out of frustration she committed suicide. It is submitted that co-accused Mohan the father-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23010 of 2025 (Mohan Vs. State of U.P.), the copy of the said order has been produced before the Court which is taken on record. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 24 and is in jail since 20.01.2025.

¶13

Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. It is submitted that the deceased died an unnatural death within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house and there are allegations of demand of dowry, harassment and torture by the applicant and other co-accused persons. It is submitted that coaccused who has been granted bail is the father-in-law of the deceased and since the applicant is the husband of the deceased, the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of the coaccused.

¶14

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. It is submitted that the deceased died within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house and there are allegations of demand of dowry, harassment and torture by the applicant and other co-accused persons. The death is unnatural. Co-accused who has been granted bail is the father-in-law of the deceased and since the applicant is the husband of the deceased, the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of the co-accused.

¶15

BAIL No. 38427 of 2025

¶16

3

¶17