2025:UHC:6791 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1356/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Deepak Pethshali, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the State. 3. Present applicant ‘Pankaj Kumar, son of Shri Pawan Kumar,’ is praying for regular bail in relation to First Information Report dated 07.01.2025 bearing FIR No. 0001 of 2025, Police Station – Riknikhal, District – Pauri Garhwal wherein present applicant along with six others have been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 80, 85 of BNS, 2023 read with Section 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, in which on completion of investigation the present applicant has been charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Section 80 (2), 85 and 123 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that present applicant is the husband of the deceased and their marriage was solemnized in the year 2023 and due to some unavoidable circumstances, the deceased consumed poison. He further submits that in fact, the deceased was in depression and there is a delay of 4 days in lodging the FIR and charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no need of custodial interrogation and the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.06.2025. 5. He further submits that this is a glaring example of malicious prosecution. Rather, family members of the deceased demanded a huge amount from the applicant, two days before the death of the deceased. He further submits that investigation was carried out in a very casual manner and without collecting the credible evidence, charge sheet has been filed. He further submits that merely on the basis of suspicion, applicant has been implicated and there is no evidence with regard to demand of dowry. He further submits that from the contents of the FIR as well as charge sheet no cognizable offence are been made. 6. On the other side, learned AGA for the State has seriously opposed the bail by submitting that undisputedly, deceased died due to consumption of 2025:UHC:6791 poison that too in her matrimonial house and after thorough investigation and collecting the credible evidence, charge sheet has been filed. He further submits that applicant was married with the deceased in the year 2023 and deceased was died within seven years of marriage. He further submits that this is a case in which not only present applicant - husband of the deceased but other family members of applicants were also implicated, however, during investigation, all others accused except present applicant have been exonerated which itself reveals that investigation was carried out by the I.O. in fair and transparent manner. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the contents of the FIR and other material available on record, this Court is of the view that applicant does not deserve for bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 01.08.2025 SKS 2025:UHC:6791