Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 27279 (ALL)

ANISH SAHANI v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/8717/2025 · 2025-05-06

Samit Gopal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73710 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8717 of 2025 Applicant :- Anish Sahani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Gupta,Prateek Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Prateek Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant- Anish Sahani, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 0134 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Sahjanwa, District Gorakhpur. 4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 07.06.2022 by Pramila Devi against the applicant and four other persons alleging therein that the marriage of her daughter was solemnized with Anish Sahani (the applicant) three years ago. After marriage the accused persons used to torture, harass and assault her for dowry but she was unable to fulfill their demand as demanded. Six months earlier her daughter was assaulted by her in-laws which after her daughter informed to police on dial 112 after which compromise was done. On 02.06.2022 at about 08:06 pm her daughter called her on her mobile phone and told that her in-laws were assaulting very badly. In the night on 02/03.06.2022 at about 02:15 am she was informed that her daughter has died due to consume poison. The accused persons have murdered her daughter by giving poison. Report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he is not involved in the matter. It is submitted that the allegations as levelled against the applicant and other co-accused persons are general and omnibus in nature. While placing para 23 of the affidavit it is submitted that the the deceased and the applicant were leading a happy married life as is evident from the fact that a child was born from the wedlock. Further while placing para 27 of the affidavit it is submitted that at the time of inquest the applicant was present when panchayatnama was conducted. It is further submitted that the deceased was not found to have received any bodily injury and the viscera was preserved, after examination chlorpyrifos insecticide poison was found in it. It is further submitted that co-accused Malti Devi the mother-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.11.2024 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 41339 of 2024 (Malti Devi Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order is annexed as annexure 15 to the affidavit. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 29 of the affidavit and is in jail since 10.05.2024. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. It is submitted that the deceased died an unnatural death within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house and there is an allegation of demand of dowry, harassment, torture and assault against the applicant and other co-accused persons. 7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. There is an allegation of demand of dowry, torture, assault and harassment by the applicant and other co-accused persons. The deceased died an unnatural death within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house. The said co-accused who has been granted bail, is the mother-in-law of the deceased whereas the applicant is the husband of the deceased. No ground for bail is made out. I do not find it to be a fit case for bail. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. 9. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad