Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 177740 (ALL)

SUDAMA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME AND ANOTHER

/1746/2025 · 2025-11-20

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1746 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in FIR No.0177 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80 (2) BNS, and 3/4 D.P. Act, PS - Gudamba, District Lucknow. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of FIR it was alleged that daughter of the informant was married with the son of the applicant on 05.5.2023. Subsequently, she was harassed for dowry and was hanged to death for non payment of dowry. Postmortem report is on record which indicates the cause of death and anti mortem hanging and apart from the ligature mark no other injury was observed. Applicant is mother in law apprehendig arrest. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail prayer. 5. Considering the nature of allegations and postmortem report and also that there is nothing specific against the applicant who is aged about 64 years is entitled to the benefit of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. 6. In the event of arrest, let the applicant - Sudama be released on anticipatory bail in the abovesaid first information report number till conclusion of the trial on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) The applicant 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sudama .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another .....Opposite Party(s) him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (d) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. November 20, 2025 mks NABAIL No. 1746 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench