Allahabad High Court
Harsh Alias Vicky vs State Of U.P. on 26 August, 2025
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:149172
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10430 of 2025
Court No. - 65
HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Tarun Jha, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Shiv Bahadur Yadav, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Session Trial No. 90 of 2024, Case Crime No. 106 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Orai, District- Jalaun with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 29.05.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the deceased to cruelty for demand of dowry, thereby leading her to death on 14.02.2024.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant has nothing to to with the said offence. The witnesses have stated that she has committed suicide. It is further stated that cause of death is due to asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. There is no criminal history of the applicant.The applicant is in jail since 16.02.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt and cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem injury. The deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, as such, he is not entitled for bail.
7. This Court had called for status of trial from the trial concerned. As per the status report dated 05.08.2025 received from the trial court concerned four witness has been examined.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
9. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.
10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.
11. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
August 26, 2025
Sharad/-
