Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 113211 (ALL)

DEEPAK v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/47276/2024 · 2025-07-09

Krishan Pahal

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110410 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47276 of 2024 Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hanuman Prasad Kushwaha,Nanhe Lal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Chandra Prakash Pandey,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. None is present on behalf of the informant even in the revised call. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Nanhe Lal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 950 of 2024, under Sections 80, 85 of BNS and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Kotwali Lalitpur, District - Lalitpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant as per Hindu Rites on 07.02.2024. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for a demand of Rs. 5 lakhs as additional dowry thereby leading her to death on 07.10.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim has committed suicide as she suspected the applicant having an affair with some lady. Learned counsel has placed much reliance upon the statement of sister of the applicant, Princy, who is seven years old only and she has stated that the door of the room of the deceased person was closed from inside when the deceased had committed suicide, she had opened the door by putting her finger through the gap of the door, as such, it is a clear cut case of suicide. 7. Learned counsel has next contended that the cause of death of deceased has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.10.2024. The applicant has criminal history of one case which has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today in court. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. 9. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay in lodging the FIR and also considering the statement of sister of the applicant coupled by the fact that the cause of death of deceased has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Deepak, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date:- 10.7.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad