Bharat Singh and Another vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:37718

Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4083 of 2025 Applicant :- Bharat Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶4

1. List revised.

¶5

Heard Sri Ram Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

This bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S has been filed by the applicantsBharat Singh and Smt. Maya @ Lalani, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 390 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80 (2) B.N.S., 2023 and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Katghar, district Moradabad.

¶7

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 25.7.2024 by Vijay Saini against the applicants and three other persons with the allegation that his sister Preeti was married to Heera on 19.4.2018. After marriage they had two children. The accused persons used to torture his sister for dowry, cash and gifts. The accused persons were not happy with the dowry, cash and gifts given to them and there was a demand of a Swift Car and due to non-fulfillment of the same, she used to be regularly tortured physically and mentally. Previously a case regarding torture and harassment was lodged in which Heera, the husband and Bharat Singh, the fatherin-law had also suffered jail and since then they were having enmity. On 5.7.2024 at about 8 p.m. his sister for the last time talked to her mother after which no news was received. On 7.7.2024 at about 5-6 a.m. Heera called the mother of the first informant and told her that Preeti had gone to market on 6.7.2024 at about 2 p.m. but has not returned back. On suspicion the informant and his family members strictly asked Heera about it who then told them that he has murdered Preeti inside the house and has thrown the body in Ram Ganga. Since then the informant and his family members are searching the dead-body. The accused persons due to dowry have murdered his sister and in order to destroy the evidence, have got the deadbody disappeared. The FIR be lodged and action be taken.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant no.1 is the father-inlaw and applicant no.2 is the mother-in-law of the deceased. There are general and omnibus allegations levelled against the applicants. It is argued that the deceased went away from the house and disappeared and as such is not traceable. It is argued that co-accused Akash has been granted bail by the trial court concerned vide order

¶9

dated 9.8.2024, copy of the same is annexed as Annexure No.9 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It is argued that Heera, the husband of the deceased is in jail. The applicant no.2 is lady and is entitled to get benefit under Section 480 B.N.S.S. It has also been pointed out that the applicants are not having any criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and are in jail since 14.12.2024.

¶10

Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the deceased as per the case of the prosecution itself was staying with the applicants in the same house and has disappeared. Even her dead-body has not been recovered till date. It is further submitted that the Investigating Officer has recovered the broken bangles and half pant of Heera, the husband and Scooty on the pointing out of co-accused Heera. He has placed before the Court a judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Shabeen Ahmad Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and another in SLP (Crl.) No.15156 of 2024, para 15 to buttress his arguments, as such bail application of the applicant be rejected.

¶11

After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the deceased was the daughter-in-law of the applicants who was married to the son of the applicants. The deceased was living in the same house. She had disappeared. Even the dead-body of the deceased has not been recovered till date. There is allegation of demand of dowry, torture and harassment by the applicants. Even prior to the present incident a police case was initiated for torture in which Heera, the husband and applicant no.1 Bharat Singh were arrested.

¶12

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of incident and the gravity of the incident, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected .

¶13

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 17.3.2025 Gaurav Kuls

¶15

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bharat Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

Bharat Singh and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishwajeet vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Monu vs State of U.P.

Mukesh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashok Kumar vs State of U.P.

Rani Devi vs State of U.P.

Rajjo Alias Manjoo vs State of U.P.