Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 107002 (ALL)

RUPESH TIWARI v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/41698/2024 · 2025-08-05

Krishan Pahal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:132488 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41698 of 2024 Applicant :- Rupesh Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Mishra,Shireesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Atul Kumar Singh,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Atul Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State. 4. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.307 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Gonda, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 5. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 8.7.2021, and subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the victim to cruelty for demand of Rs.5 lakh and a car as dowry, thereby leading her to death on 9.9.2023. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed as there is not time of offence mentioned in it. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased person have already been enlarged on bail by this Court. Learned counsel has placed much reliance on the statement of witnesses PW-1 and PW-2 who have not supported the prosecution story during cross-examination, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail as there is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the present case. 8. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR has been instituted after the inquest report and the applicant was present at the time of inquest proceedings. The cause of death was asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.9.2023 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that examination-in-chief of PW-1 was conducted on 5.4.2025 and the cross-examination was taken up on several dates starting from 17.7.2025 to 25.7.2025. The statement of PW-2 was recorded subsequent to it and she has supported the prosecution story during examination-in-chief. 10. Learned counsel for the informant has further argued that there is a video sent by the deceased person to the informant which indicates the complicity of the applicant in the instant incident. As such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 11. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the difference of examination-in-chief and cross- examination of PW-1 and also the said video purported to have been given by the deceased person to the informant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 12. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 13. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 14. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 6.8.2025/ Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad