Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 172112 (ALL)

NEERAJ v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/5505/2025 · 2025-10-29

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5505 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Singh, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire material available on record. 2. The applicant-Neeraj has filed the instant bail application with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.225 of 2024, under Sections 108, 64 of B.N.S., Police Station Eka, District Firozabad, during the pendency of the trial. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the informant's daughter namely Lovely has solemnised marriage out of her own free will with the applicant on 26.04.2023 and thereafter, she started residing with the applicant at Tanda, District Firozabad. It has also been averred that his daughter had intimated him telephonically several times, that the applicant and his family members demands a car, the informant tried to explain them but all in vain and his daughter has committed suicide. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially F.I.R., has been registered under Sections 85, 80(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act but after recording of the statement of the first informant, the case has been converted under Sections 108, 64 of B.N.S., Learned counsel further argued that the applicant and the deceased were having an affair for the last three years and since the marriage was against the wishes of the informant, thus the F.I.R., of the instant case has been registered. He further submits that neither there was any demand of dowry nor there is any suicide note to connect the complicity of the applicant in commission of alleged offence and that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Dwivedi, Yogesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Neeraj .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 25.07.2024. It is thus contended that the applicant is entitled for bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State has contended that there is specific allegation against the applicant. He next submits that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 6. The prosecution version is fully corroborated with the statements of the informant as well as other witnesses. Furthermore perusal of the record shows that the applicant was married with the elder daughter of the informant and out of the said wedlock, two children were also born. Thereafter the applicant had developed relation with the younger daughter of the informant and he took her away on account of said relation, the applicant ousted his wife from her matrimonial house. The victim also conceived from the accused applicant and when the applicant made pressure for abortion, the victim has committed suicide as such the complicity of the applicant in commission of alleged offence is made out. 7. Keeping in view submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gravity of offence, nature of allegations and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the accused-applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. October 30, 2025 S.Ali BAIL No. 5505 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad