Allowed

Devesh Katiyar Alias Devesh Kumar Katiyar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Sept 2025CRLA/3768/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against rejection of bail in a case of dowry death and SC/ST offences arising from a woman's death by hanging after an inter-caste marriage. The court found the appeal had substance, set aside the order rejecting bail and released the appellant on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to stated conditions; impugned order dated 14.11.2024 rejecting bail set aside.

Devesh Katiyar Alias Devesh Kumar Katiyar Vs State of… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3768 of 2024

¶3

Devesh Katiyar Alias Devesh Kumar Katiyar

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Appellant(s) : Shivam Gupta, Hemant Kumar Pandey, Osama Syed, Shishir Kumar Saxena Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Aakanksha Shah, Manish Kumar Yadav, Randhir Singh

¶7

Court No. - 11

¶8

HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

¶9

Heard Shri Shivam Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Randhir Singh, learned counsel for the respondent as well as learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶10

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 (in short "Act of 1989") against the impugned order dated 14.11.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 8862 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "I.P.C."), Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 3(2)V of S.C/S.T Act, P.S. Para, District - Lucknow.

¶11

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated by lodging an FIR on 08.04.2024 at about 08:54 hours. He has not committed any crime and the implication is just to harass the appellant.

¶12

In continuation, he further submitted that the appellant and the deceased were in affair. The appellant belonging to the OBC category was in affair with the deceased, who belonged to the S.C category. The period of relationship was about four years and their marriage was solemnised as per hindu rites and rituals, with the consent of the family members, meaning thereby that the family members of both the parties were present at the marriage ceremony held on 08.12.2023.

¶13

It is further stated that undisputedly, the marriage was love marriage and in this view of the matter, it can be inferred that it is not a case of dowry death.

¶14

CRLA No. 3768 of 2024

¶15

¶16

It is further stated that if the case of the other side is taken on its face value, which is to the effect that the appellant, at the time of marriage, was unemployed and the car was gifted/provided by the deceased to the appellant, then from this fact, it can be inferred that the parties, at that point of time, were in cordial relations.

¶17

It is further submitted that in the night of 07.08.2024, the wife of the appellant (deceased), for the reasons best known to her, committed suicide, which is evident from the medico-legal report/post-mortem report, according to which, the autopsy surgeon found following injuries:-

¶18

"1. AN OBLIQUE LIGATURE MARK 28 CM X 25 CM PRESENT ON ALL AROUND THE NECK, ABOVE THYROID CARTILAGE, INFRONT OF NECK PASSING OBLIQUELY UPWARD AND BACKWARD ALONG THE LINE OF MANDIBLE, AND IT IS INTERRUPTED BY 09 CM ON BACK OF NECK, LIGATURE MARK SITUATED 05 CM BELOW THE RIGHT EAR AND 06 CM BELOW THE LEFT EAR, BASE OF GROOVE OF LIGATURE MARK IS YELLOWISH HARD AND PARCHMENT LIKE.

¶19

ON OPENING SUB CUTANEOUS TISSUES UNDERNEATH THE LIGATURE MARK ARE WHITE HARD AND GLISTENING, DRY STAIN OF SALIVA MARK PRE-SENT FRONT OF CHEST AND ABDOMEN.

¶20

2- CONTUSION 6 CM X 3 CM PRESENT ON BACK OF HEAD AT OCCIPUT

¶21

3- CONTUSION 3 CM X 2 CM PRESENT ON LATERAL ASPECT OF LEFT ARM 12 CM BELOW LEFT AXILLA.

¶22

4- CONTUSION 2.5 CMTX 1 CM PRESENT ON BACK OF RIGHT ELBOW JOINT.

¶23

5. CONTUSION 3 CM X 2 CM PRESENT ON LATERAL ASPECT OF LEFT THIGH 10 CM BELOW LEFT ILEAC CREST.

¶24

6- CONTUSION 3 CM X 2 CM PRESENT ON LATERAL ASPECT OF LEFT THIGH 2 CM BELOW IN-JURY NO-5.

¶25

7- ABRASION 8 CM X 2 CM PRESENT ON LEFT SIDE LOWER BACK 30 CM LATERAL TO SACRAL REGION.

¶26

8-CONTUSION 4 CM X 2 CM PRESENT ON BACK OF RIGHT KNEE JOINT.

¶27

ON OPENING ECCHYMOSIS PRESENT UNDERNEATH ALL ABOVE MENTION INJURIES EXCEPT INJURY NO-1."

¶28

Further submission is that other injuries nos. 2 to 8 could be sustained while handling the body of the deceased as the cause of death is 'Asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging'.

¶29

CRLA No. 3768 of 2024

¶30

¶31

It is further submitted that it appears that the deceased was harassed by her family members for solemnising marriage with the appellant, a person belonging to OBC category, and therefore, she committed suicide.

¶32

It is further submitted that one of the fact witness, i.e. the brother of the deceased has been examined before the trial court.

¶33

Thus, indulgence of this Court is required and as such, the appellant, who is in jail since 09.04.2024 and having no criminal history, is entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

¶34

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant. However, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel.

¶35

Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., post-mortem report as well as statement of the witness.

¶36

Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances, including the facts related to the marriage of appellant and the deceased and cause of death as also the period of incarceration since 09.04.2024, and also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed .

¶37

Order dated 14.11.2024, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 8862 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "I.P.C"), Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 3(2)V of S.C/S.T Act, P.S. Para, District - Lucknow is set aside.

¶38

Let appellant Devesh Katiyar Alias Devesh Kumar Katiyar , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

¶39

(i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶40

(ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶41

(iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es).

¶42

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

¶43

CRLA No. 3768 of 2024

¶44

¶45

(v) The appellant 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.

¶46

(vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶47

(vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶48

(viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./Section 351 BNSS.

¶49

In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

¶50

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order.

¶51

September 11, 2025 DiVYa

¶52

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

¶53

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Devesh Katiyar Alias Devesh Kumar Katiyar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devesh Katiyar Alias Devesh Kumar Katiyar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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

Abhinav Saxena and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Avtar Singh Alias Savi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Samar Bahadur Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Devesh Katiyar Alias Devesh Kumar Katiyar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Juvenile a Thru. His Father Shri Bajrangi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Mohd. Ashif Alias Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another