Deepak vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51267

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6034 of 2025

Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Jagadish Prasad Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Jagadish Prasad Yadav, 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 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Deepak , seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 174 of 2024, under Sections 80(2), 85, 115(2) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Bhadohi, District Bhadohi.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is the Devar of the deceased Smt Ganga Devi. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the marriage of the deceased was solemnized with Santosh Dhiver the elder brother of the applicant around five years back. It is further argued that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and all the accused persons. The deceased committed suicide which is suggestive from the postmortem examination report, wherein, the deceased has received a single ligature mark on her body and the cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. It is argued that co-accused Sugra Devi the motherin-law and Mahendra Dhiver the father-in-law of the deceased have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 12.12.2024 and 04.02.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 45610 of 2025 and 428 of 2025, the copy of the said orders are annexed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit. Further co-accused Rinkoo Dhiver has also been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 20.03.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6353 of 2025, the copy of the said order has been produced before the Court which is taken on record. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 04.09.2024.

¶10

Per contra , learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the first information report along with other accused persons and there are allegations against him. It is submitted that the deceased was found to be pregnant during postmortem examination and a lady who is pregnant to this stage is very unlikely to commit suicide.

¶11

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is Devar of the deceased. General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the applicant and other accused persons in the first information report. The cause of death of the deceased is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Co-accused Sugra Devi, Mahendra Dhiver and Rinkoo Dhiver have been granted bail.

¶12

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.

¶13

Let the applicant- Deepak , 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

The bail application is allowed .

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 9.4.2025 AS Rathore

¶24

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶25

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

Deepak v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Fateh Khan vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar @ Ghasi vs State of U.P.

Seratunnisha vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Alias Monu vs State of U.P.

Aziz vs State of U.P.

Waseem vs State of U.P.