Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026 Latest Caselaw 1600 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand on 27 February, 2026

             Office Notes,
            reports, orders
            or proceedings
SL.   Dat
             or directions                               COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.    e
            and Registrar's
              order with
              Signatures

                              Second Bail Application No. 02 of 2025
                              In
                              CRLA No. 553 of 2024
                              Shyama Devi
                                                                   --Appellant
                                                     Versus
                              State of Uttarakhand
                                                                 --Respondent
                                                  With
                              CRLA No. 542 of 2024
                              Suraj
                                                                   --Appellant
                                                     Versus
                              State of Uttarakhand
                                                                 --Respondent
                              Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.

Mr. Aditya Singh, learned counsel for the Appellant.

2. Mr. G.C. Joshi, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the Second Bail Application (I.A. No. 02 of 2025), filed in CRLA No. 553 of 2024.

4. The present Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 09.08.2024 and sentencing order dated 14.08.2024, passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun in Sessions Trial No. 50 of 2021, "State vs. Suraj and Others," whereby the Appellant has been sentenced under Section 304-B IPC to undergo ten years' rigorous imprisonment; under Section 498-A IPC to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month's additional imprisonment; and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month's additional imprisonment.

5. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that, as on date, the Appellant has already completed more than four years of actual sentence out of the ten years' sentence awarded to her. It is further submitted that the deceased committed suicide by hanging; that the allegations in the FIR are omnibus and general in nature; and that as per the post-mortem report, only a ligature mark was found on the neck of the deceased and no other external injuries were present on her body. It is also submitted that the doctor (PW-5) categorically stated that the cause of death was due to ante-mortem hanging and that there were no other external injuries, thereby falsifying the allegations of physical harassment.

6. Learned State Counsel opposed the bail application contending that half of the sentence has not yet been completed by the Appellant.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that, at this stage, sufficient grounds exist for granting bail to the Appellant during the pendency of the appeal.

8. The Second Bail Application is allowed. Accordingly, the Appellant - Shyama Devi - shall be released on bail during the pendency of the present criminal appeal upon her executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

9. It is clarified that the grant of bail shall not be treated as a ground for seeking unnecessary adjournments or for delaying the disposal of the present criminal appeal.

10. List these cases on 18.05.2026.

(Ashish Naithani, J.) 27.02.2026 Shiksha