Rakesh vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1557 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Rakesh vs State Of Uttarakhand on 26 February, 2026

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

            First Bail Application No.1288 of 2024


Rakesh                                                    ........Applicant

                                 Versus

State of Uttarakhand                                     ........Respondent
Present:-
            Mr. Shariq Khursid, Advocate for the applicant.
            Mr. Pankaj Joshi, A.G.A. for the State.


Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No. 412 of 2022,

under Section 304B, 302, 498A IPC and Section3/4 of the Dowry

Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Transit Camp, District Udham

Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record.

3. The applicant and the deceased were married on

02.05.2022. FIR records that even on the date of marriage, there was a

dispute with regard to the dowry, but somehow the marriage was

solemnized. Finally, on 26.10.2022, the deceased was killed.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

applicant is in custody for a long now. More than seven witnesses, who

are star witnesses have already been examined. Hence, it is a case fit for

bail.

5. Learned State counsel submits that within five months of

her marriage, the deceased was killed. There are witnesses who have

stated about the demand of dowry. There are eyewitnesses also, when

the appellant strangulated his wife to death. Reference has been made to

the statement of Prem Rajput, Jamuna Devi and others.

6. It is the stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected

of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any

observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent

stage of the trial or in any other proceedings.

7. The applicant and the deceased were married on

02.05.2022. The informant is elder brother of the deceased and other

witnesses have supported the prosecution case. In fact, according to the

prosecution, there were two reasons, one dowry demand and another

extramarital relations of the applicant with some of his close relative. As

per the post mortem report, the cause of death was asphyxia due to ante

mortem strangulation.

8. Having considered all attending factors, this Court is of the

view that there is no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail.

Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected.

9. The bail application is rejected.

(Ravindra Maithani, J) 26.02.2026 Jitendra