Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2480 (UTT)

MOHIT v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

BA1/265/2025 · 2025-03-20

Rakesh Thapliyal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:2002 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/265/2025 Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Tapan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. and Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant- Mohit, S/o Sri Sushil is in judicial custody since 28.08.2024 in relation to FIR dated 24.06.2024 bearing FIR No. 225 of 2024 registered at P.S. Jhabrera District Haridwar wherein the present applicant has been implicated for the offence punishable under Section 304-B IPC. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant married with the deceased in the year 2019 and from this marriage two children were born. It is further submitted that there is no evidence with the prosecution with regard to the demand of dowry except the statement of the family members of the deceased who are brother, father, mother and sister of the deceased. It is submitted that, prima facie, it appears to be a case of suicide. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the investigation is already completed and the charge sheet has also been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation. 5. On the other side, Mr. Siddharth Bisht, learned A.G.A. for the State submits that after collecting all credible evidence charge sheet has been filed, however, he has not disputed that charge sheet has already been filed, and there is no need of custodial interrogation of the 2025:UHC:2002 applicant and the applicant has no previous criminal history. 7. After hearing the argument of the learned counsel for the parties, and further taking into consideration the fact that charge sheet has already been filed and there is no need of custodial interrogation of the applicant, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves for bail. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant Mohit be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 20.03.2025 Parul 2025:UHC:2002