Allowed

Vikesh Gupta v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Mar 2025BAIL/8424/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 103(1), 351(2), 61(2) BNS for alleged burning of the applicant's wife for dowry. Two dying declarations implicated only other family members, not the applicant. Court granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding trial attendance and non-tampering.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:56268

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8424 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vikesh Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Om Narayan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Om Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.745 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 351(2) and 61(2) BNS, Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur during pendency of the trial.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged on 21.9.2024 against the applicant and his family members and according to the FIR, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the sister of the informant about two years before and on 26.2.2024 for want of dowry they tried to ablaze her and thereafter applicant was challaned under Section 151 Cr.P.C. and again on 21.9.2024 at about 9.20 AM in the morning applicant along with his family members set fire on her after pouring diesel with intention to commit her murder. It is further mentioned in the FIR that sister of the informant is admitted in the Hospital in serious condition.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 109(1) and 85 BNS but

¶11

after the death of the injured, i.e., wife of the applicant case has been converted under Section 103 BNS.

¶12

He further submits that however, applicant is the husband of the deceased but allegations levelled against him in the FIR are pertinently false and this fact is evident from the dying declaration of the deceased recorded by Naib Tehsildar as well as by Investigating Officer of the case which have been annexed in the affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application.

¶13

He further submits that from the perusal of both the dying declarations it reflects that deceased did not state that applicant also involved in her ablazing.

¶14

He further submits that from the dying declaration recorded by Naib Tehsildar dated 21.9.2024 it reflects that she made allegation only against her mother-in-law and however from the alleged dying declaration recorded by Investigating Officer dated 22.9.2024 it reflects that she along with the mother-in-law also made allegation against her brother-in-law (jeth) and sister-in-law (jethani) and others but not against applicant.

¶15

He further submits that therefore, considering both the dying declarations of the deceased it could not be reflected that applicant tried to ablaze her.

¶16

He further submits that from the dying declaration of the deceased recorded by Naib Tehsildar that it reflects that at the time of incident even applicant was not present at his home.

¶17

He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 08.1.2025.

¶18

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is the husband of the deceased and his wife died due to burn injuries within two years of her marriage but he could not dispute the fact that in none of the dying declaration, deceased made any allegation against the applicant.

¶19

Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that from the dying declaration recorded by Naib Tehsildar it reflects at the time of incident applicant was not even at his home.

¶20

Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history to his credit.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶22

However, applicant is the husband of the deceased and as per allegation made in the FIR he along with his family members tried to commit murder of his wife by ablazing her but there are two dying declarations of the deceased on record. First was recorded by Naib Tehsildar on 21.9.2024 and another one was the statement of the deceased recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 180 BNSS and both the dying declarations have been annexed along with the instant bail application.

¶23

From the perusal of both the dying declarations of the deceased it reflects that she in her both the dying declarations did not make any allegation against the applicant.

¶24

It reflects deceased in her first dying declaration recorded by Naib Tehsildar stated that her mother-in-law ablazed her and in her second dying declaration recorded by Investigating Officer she stated that she was set on fire by her mother-in-law and other

¶25

family members excluding the applicant.

¶26

Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 08.1.2025.

¶27

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶28

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶29

Let the applicant- Vikesh Gupta be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶30

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶31

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶32

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶33

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶34

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail

¶35

application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶36

Order Date :- 17.4.2025 SKM

¶37

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikesh Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikesh Gupta v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sonu vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahesh Prasad Rajak vs State of U.P.

Makardhwaj Bhoi vs State of Up

Akash vs State of U.P.

Mohd Irfan vs State of U.P.

Atul vs State of U.P.