Dismissed¶9

Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC4 Mar 2025BAIL/4938/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail REJECTED - dowry death case (Ss. 498-A, 304-B, 352, 506 IPC + Ss. 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act), Case Crime No. 313 of 2024, P.S. Powayan, Distt. Shahjahanpur; applicant Pawan Kumar (husband of deceased Pushpa Devi); FIR 29.04.2024 by brother Vinod; post-mortem 28.04.2024 - ligature mark 26 x 2 cm, contusion right eye, lacerated wound lower lip, injuries unexplained; applicant in jail since 29.04.2024; co-accused in-laws earlier granted bail (17.10.2024, 23.11.2024); Section 439 CrPC; decided by Samit Gopal, J., High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.

What did the court decide?

It is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased; he is named in the first information report and there are allegations against him. ¶8

Pawan Kumar vs State of U.P. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38358

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4938 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Alok Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on records.

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Pawan Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 313 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 352, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Powayan, District Shahjahanpur.

¶9

The first information report of the matter was lodged on 29.04.2024 by Vinod against the applicant and 08 other persons with the allegation that his sister Pushpa Devi was married with Pawan Kumar (the applicant) around four years back and has given gifts as dowry as per his status. The accused persons were not satisfied with the same and used to beat her. Around six months back she gave birth to a girl child after which torture on Pushpa increased. On 27.04.2024 at about 6.00 PM Pushpa Devi had a talk with his wife Rekha Devi. On 28.04.2024 at about 6.15 AM he received a call that Pushpa is ill and they may come there after which they went there and found his sister to be lying dead. There were injury marks on her neck and leg. Her clothes were also torn. On asking Pawan Kumar the cause for death, he started fighting with them, they forced him to immediately take the body of the deceased with them. A first information report be lodged and action be taken.

¶10

The postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted on 28.04.2024 and the doctor found the following injuries on her body:-

¶11

"Antemortem Injury: 1. A ligature mark 26 cm x 2 cm around the neck, obliquely upward between chin and larynx, Interrupted with the gap of 4 cm left side back of Neck, 6 cm below Rt ear, 5 cm below left ear and 5.5 cm below mid of chin. The groove is dry and parchment like on section the substantive tissue under the ligature mark is white and gusting.

¶12

2. Contusion 9 x 8 cm present on Right eye.

¶13

3. Lacerated wound 5 x 5 cm x muscle deep present on Rt side lower lip."

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant argued 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 applicant and the deceased were leading a happy married life and one child was born from the wedlock. While placing paragraph 11 of the affidavit it is submitted that the deceased was married against her wish in village in a poor family therefore she was under depression as she was brought up in a city. It is submitted that co-accused Tejram the father-in-law and Smt. Usha the mother-inlaw of the deceased have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 17.10.2024 and 23.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 32050 of 2024 and 31979 of 2024, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-9 to the affidavit. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 16 and is in jail since 29.04.2024.

¶15

Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. He is named in the first information report and there are allegations against him.

¶16

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. He is named in the first information report and there are allegations against him. The postmortem examination report goes to show that the deceased had received one contusion and one lacerated wound also on her body for which there is no plausible explanation.

¶17

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 18.3.2025 AS Rathore

¶20

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶21

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

Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Chandrabhan Alias Karode vs State of U.P.

Pinkal Singh @ Satyam Singh vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Kushwaha vs State of U.P.

Narendra Bhartiya vs State of U.P.

Rinkoo Dhiver vs State of U.P.

Junaid Ahmad vs State of U.P. and 2 Others