Anil vs State of U.P.

Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶11

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Anil , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 232 of 2025, under Sections 85, 115(2), 80 B.N.S. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Milak, District Rampur.

¶12

The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 18.06.2025 by Harish against the applicant, Rama Shankar, Vidya, Ajay and Kanak alleging therein that the marriage of his sister was solemnized with the applicant on 11.06.2024 in which he had given gifts and dowry but her in-laws and her husband were pressurizing her for bringing dowry from her maternal house and harass, torture and assault her. Her devar Ajay and nand Kanak used to assist them. On 18.06.2025 Anil her husband called him on phone and told him that he has murdered his sister Suman and he may come and taken her body. When he reached there he found her body lying there. A report be lodged and action be taken.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the postmortem examination report of the deceased states that there was no injury found on her body and the cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. It is submitted while placing the copy of viscera report which is annexed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit that no chemical poison was found in the viscera examination. It is submitted that

¶14

BAIL No. 43549 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

thus the deceased died a natural death. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 15 of the affidavit and is in jail since 20.06.2025.

¶17

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 investigation in the matter has concluded and charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant Anil and co-accused Rama Shankar the father-in-law of the deceased although co-accused Smt. Vidya, Ajay and Kanak have been exonerated during investigation. 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 and as such the prayer for bail be rejected.

¶18

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased was not found to have received any bodily injury as per the postmortem examination report and thus the cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. The viscera after examination was not found to contain any chemical poison as reported in its report dated 29.08.2025. Out of 05 accused named in the first information report 03 have been exonerated during investigation whereas charge-sheet has been submitted only against the applicant and co-accused Rama Shankar the father-in-law, the investigation thus has concluded.

¶19

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Let the applicant- Anil , 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:-

¶21

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶22

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial

¶24

BAIL No. 43549 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶27

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023.

¶28

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023.

¶29

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶30

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶31

The bail application is allowed .

¶32

Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶33

December 10, 2025 AS Rathore

¶34

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶35

Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil 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

Similar cases

Laungshree vs State of U.P.

Shivam Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Narayan Keshari vs State of U.P.

Muniya Devi Alias Munni Devi vs State of U.P.

Sher Singh vs State of U.P.

Laungsri vs State of U.P.