Allowed

Omkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2025BAIL/8990/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by Omkar, identified as the deceased's mother-in-law. The court granted bail after considering the general and sweeping nature of the prosecution's allegations regarding dowry-related murder, the absence of specific incrimination, and the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents. Strict conditions were imposed.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions against tampering and intimidation of witnesses.

Omkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8990 of 2025

¶3

Omkar

¶4

.....Applicant(s) Versus

¶5

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

¶6

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Vivek Chandra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 12

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶10

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the informant's daughter was married to Narendra three years ago. Though sufficient dowry was given at the time of marriage, the in-laws of the deceased were dissatisfied and, consequently, committed her murder on account of dowry. Information regarding her death was conveyed by the villagers at about 1:00 a.m.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the fatherin-law of the deceased. The allegations levelled in the prosecution case are general and sweeping in nature, implicating five family members without distinction. The cause of death has been reported as asphyxia resulting from antemortem hanging, with no other antemortem injury found on the body of the deceased. The complainant, in his statement, has also made only general and sweeping allegations, without attributing any specific role to the present applicant.

¶12

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the bail application, submitting that the deceased died within seven years of marriage under unnatural circumstances arising out of demand for dowry.

¶14

BAIL No. 8990 of 2025

¶15

¶16

Upon due consideration to the facts that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased, aged about 60 years; the allegations in the prosecution case are general and sweeping; the cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging with no other antemortem injury and the applicant is in custody since 07.05.2025 with no criminal antecedents, I find this to be a fit case for granting bail to the applicant.

¶17

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant Omkar involved in Case Crime No. 117/2025, under Sections 80(2)/85 B.N.S & S. 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Rampur Kalan, District-Sitapur, be released on bail 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶19

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶20

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶21

(iii) 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.

¶22

(iv) 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.

¶23

(v) 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 in accordance with law.

¶24

(vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the 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 174-A IPC

¶25

BAIL No. 8990 of 2025

¶26

¶27

(now Section 209 of BNS). 9.

¶28

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶29

September 18, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶30

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶31

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Omkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omkar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Shubham Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Zeeshan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prn. Secy. Home Deptt. and 3 Others

Udayraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

Ram Prasad @ Kaji Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Sachin Kumar @ Akash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sumit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and 4 Others