SOMMARI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME CIVIL SECTT. LKO
BAIL/4869/2025 · 2025-05-30
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 143287 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 143287 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:33628 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4869 of 2025 Applicant :- Sommari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Shukla Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sr Anshuman Verma, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ajay Shukla, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.215 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station Motipur, District Bahraich.
3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 06.04.2025 against the applicant, his father-Ram Dhani, his mother-Smt. Jamuni and sister-Sumitra, stating that the informant had got his sister married to the applicant about an year ago; all the accused persons used to harass her for demanding dowry and they killed her on 04.04.2025.
4. The post-mortem examination report of the deceased mentions a ligature mark around the neck, passing obliquely upwards, interrupted by 4cm on right side, back of of neck and the cause of death has been opined to Asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. No other injury was found on the dead body.
5. It is relevant to note that the incident took place on 04.04.2025, the information of death was given to the police on the same day by Rakesh Nishad, brother of the informant and the deceased. He did not levelled any allegation of harassment of the deceased for demand of dowry by the accused persons.
6. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has no criminal history and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has also been submitted that the co-accused Smt. Jamuni Devi
has already been enlarged on bail by this court by means of an
order dated 27.05.2025, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4640 of 2025.
7. The learned A.G.A has opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the investigation of the case is still pending.
8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the victim died on 04.04.2025 and in the first information of her death given to the police, by her brother did not levelled any allegation of demand of dowry and those allegations were levelled for the first time in the F.I.R lodged two days after the incident; no specific allegation has been levelled against the applicant in the F.I.R and that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 16.04.2025 and the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this court, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.
9. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.
10. Let the applicant-Sommari be released on bail in aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: - (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)
Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench