Nanhu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39930

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4592 of 2025

Applicant :- Nanhu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Hemant Kumar Mishra,Abhishek Mishra,Arti Ganguly Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Nanhu) is languishing in jail since 31.01.2025 in Case Crime No.0080 of 2025, under Sections 85 & 80 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Barabanki.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).

¶9

4. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicant. So as to implicate the entire family, the present applicant who is fatherin-law, has been implicated in this case. No specific role has been attributed to the present applicant. The cause of death is due to Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The present applicant was having cordial relation with his daughterin-law (since deceased) and he has never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. There might be some scuffle between the husband and wife but she is not aware of such scuffle.

¶10

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The charge-sheet has been filed. He undertakes on behalf of the present applicant that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if

¶11

so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order.

¶12

6. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, she is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicant; no specific role has been attributed to the present applicant; the cause of death is Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging; the present applicant was having cordial relation with his daughter-in-law (since deceased); the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order; without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case.

¶14

8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶15

9. Let the applicant (Nanhu) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶16

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶18

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such

¶19

proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 of 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. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶21

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶22

Order Date :- 14.7.2025 Suresh/

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Nanhu v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanhu v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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

Sarvesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko

Arti Gupta @ Savitri Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Ravishankar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Vijay Kuamr @ Vijayi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Aneeta Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Vinay vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.