Allowed

Praveen v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Apr 2025BAIL/4028/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a case alleging Section 498A and 306 IPC offences related to his wife's suicide. The court noted the allegations involved torture after 12 years of marriage but found no prior complaints and granted release on bond.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear in court, not interfere with evidence, and avoid anti-social activities.

Praveen vs State of U.P. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:59185

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4028 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Praveen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Kumar Srivastava,Somesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Gaurav Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.N. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 242 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 306, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Khatauli, District Muzaffarnagar during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is husband of the deceased and as per allegation due to the torture of applicant and his family members for demand of dowry his wife i.e. deceased committed suicide but entire allegation leveled against the applicant is totally false.

¶9

He further submits, deceased committed suicide after 12 years of her marriage and it is hard to believe that even after 12 years of marriage applicant and his family members tortured her for demand of dowry.

¶10

He further submits, applicant was in the job in Noida and deceased used to tell him that after quitting the job he should live with her and only due to this dispute she committed suicide.

¶11

He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.06.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is husband of the deceased and as per allegation due to his torture deceased committed suicide but learned AGA could not dispute the fact that deceased committed

¶13

suicide after 12 years of her marriage and before her death there is no complaint on record that applicant and his family members used to tortured her.

¶14

Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 28.06.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

However, applicant is husband of the deceased and as per allegation due to the torture of applicant and his family members for demand of dowry deceased committed suicide but considering the fact that deceased committed suicide after 12 years of her marriage, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant, cannot be ruled out at this stage specially considering the fact that there is no earlier complaint against the applicant on record with regard to torture of the deceased.

¶17

Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 28.06.2024 i.e. for last more than nine months.

¶18

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶19

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant - Praveen 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 the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶21

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶22

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶24

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶25

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶26

Order Date :- 21.4.2025 AK Pandey

¶27

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

Praveen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sundar vs State of U.P.

Irshad vs State of U.P.

Mehraj vs State of U.P.

Vivek Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P.

Manish Rai vs State of U.P.

Ramkhelawan vs State of U.P.