[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
BA1/2000/2025 on 12 March, 2026
2026:UHC:1673
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
BA1/2000/2025
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Kurban Ali, learned counsel for
the applicant.
2. Mr. K.S. Bora, learned Deputy A.G.
for the State.
3. Mr. M.K. Ray, learned counsel for
the informant/complainant.
4. This is the first bail application
filed by the applicant seeking regular
bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0005 of
2025, under Section 80(2) B.N.S.,
registered at Police Station Thana
Kalagarh, District Pauri Garhwal.
5. The F.I.R. was lodged by the
informant alleging that his daughter
(since deceased) was married to the
applicant on 29.01.2025. It is alleged
that on 15.06.2025 the deceased was
killed by strangulation at her
matrimonial home. It is further alleged
that when he reached the house of the
applicant, no family member was
present there. It is also alleged that the
applicant and his family members used
to harass the deceased for demand of
dowry and due to such harassment
they killed his daughter.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the
present case; that, there is no specific
allegation or evidence regarding
demand of dowry and only vague
allegations have been made in the
2026:UHC:1673
F.I.R.; that, no material has been
placed on record to show that the
applicant or his family members ever
demanded dowry from the complainant.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant
would further submit that as per the
post-mortem report and the statement
of the doctor, the cause of death is
compression of cervical vasculature and
asphyxia due to ante-mortem hanging
and ligature marks were found below
the thyroid cartilage and fracture of C2
and C3 vertebra.
8. During the course of arguments,
learned counsel for the applicant
produced the bank statements of the
applicant as well as the complainant to
show that no amount, as alleged by the
complainant, was ever transferred
between the accounts. The Court has
perused the bank statements and finds
that no such transaction has been
reflected therein.
9. Per contra, learned counsel for the
State as well as learned counsel for the
complainant opposed the bail
application. Learned counsel for the
complainant would argue that the
death of the deceased is unnatural and
occurred within six months of the
marriage; that, when the police reached
the place of occurrence, the applicant
and his family members were not
present in the house.
10. To this, learned counsel for the
applicant would submit that the
ingredients of Section 80(2) B.N.S. are
not made out in the present case; that,
there is no material on record to show
that the deceased was subjected to
2026:UHC:1673
cruelty or harassment in connection
with demand of dowry soon before her
death. It is also argued that the F.I.R.
does not disclose any specific demand
of dowry supported by date or any
documentary evidence.
11. Having heard learned counsel for
the parties and upon perusal of the
material available on record, this Court
finds that the allegations regarding
demand of dowry are general in nature
and no specific instance has been
mentioned. The bank statements
produced before the Court do not show
any transaction relating to the alleged
demand of dowry. At this stage, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, this Court is of the view that
the applicant has made out a case for
grant of bail.
12. Accordingly, the bail application is
allowed.
13. Let the applicant-Aamaan Khan be
released on bail in the aforesaid case on
his executing a personal bond and
furnishing two reliable sureties, each of
the like amount, to the satisfaction of
the court concerned.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
12.03.2026
Mamta
