Vimal Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

Vimal Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Vimal Singh Yadav to be released on bail in the said FIR on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, subject to conditions: (a) bond to attend hearings; (b) not to commit any similar offence; (c) not to induce, threaten or promise any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure or tamper with evidence.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Vimal Singh Yadav, in custody since 09.01.2022 in FIR No. 20 of 2022 (Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act), is entitled to be released on bail in his second bail application.

Court's answer

The bail application is allowed: considering that all fact witnesses have been examined, that prima facie the offence was allegedly committed in a state of intoxication, that the applicant has suffered pre-trial detention of more than three and a half years with no criminal antecedents and has been in custody since 09.01.2022, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Pankaj Bhatia, J. — Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 8643 of 2024 (decided November 6, 2025): Second bail application of Vimal Singh Yadav in FIR No. 20 of 2022, PS Para, District Lucknow, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, ALLOWED. Grounds: all fact witnesses examined and summons issued under Section 319 for other persons; prima facie the offence was allegedly committed in a state of intoxication; pre-trial detention exceeding three and a half years, in custody since 09.01.2022, no criminal antecedents; first bail application had been rejected vide order dated 23.02.202. Postmortem on record indicated four injuries as cause of death; informant's counsel relied on a co-accused order describing a fatal head injury caused in intoxication. Applicant released on personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each with conditions regarding attendance, non-commission of similar offences, and no inducement/tampering.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8643 of 2024

Vimal Singh Yadav

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Naresh Yadav, Vineet Kumar Chaurasia Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ashwini Kumar Tripathi

Court No. - 12

HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No20 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Para, District Lucknow.

3 . This is the second bail application. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 23.02.202.

4 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that on account of non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry, the deceased was done to death. The postmortem report on record indicates the presence four injury which was the cause of death.

5 . While arguing the second bail application, the Counsel for the applicant and the Counsel for the informant states that all the facts witnesses have been examined and the summons have been issued under Section 319 for summoning other persons. It is also agreed that the applicant is in custody since 09.01.2022 and has no criminal antecedents.

6. The Counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail prayer by arguing that even as per the statement and the observations made in an

BAIL No. 8643 of 2024

2

order passed in favour of the co-accused, it was observed that in the state of intoxication, the applicant has committed the offence in question and had cause the head injury, which was the cause of death.

7 . Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

8. Considering the fact as noted above; the fact witnesses have been examined and in terms of the statement, prima facie, the offence was allegedly committed in the state of intoxication; the applicant has suffered pretrial detention of more than three and a half years having no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 09.01.2022, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

9. Let the applicant Vimal Singh Yadav be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(Pankaj Bhatia,J.)

November 6, 2025

akverma

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench