Allahabad High Court

Rahul Bind vs State Of U.P. on 19 August, 2025

Author:
Krishan Pahal

Bench:
Krishan Pahal

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:141313

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6268 of 2025

Applicant :- Rahul Bind

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Kashi Nath Singh Yadav

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Amrita Singh,G.A.

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Kashi Nath Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Amrita Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 27 of 2024, under
Sections 498A
,
304B
IPC and
Section 3
/
of D.P. Act, Police Station Karnda, District Ghazipur, during the pendency of trial.

4. As per prosecution story, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu rites on 13.12.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the deceased to cruelty for demand of Rs.two lacs as dowry and thereby led her to death on 11.03.2024 at about 5:35 p.m.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

6. Learned counsel has further stated that the cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. The deceased has committed suicide by hanging herself and the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence.

7. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.03.2024 and only one witness has been examined to date. The applicant has no criminal history. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

8. Per contra, learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt and the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, as such the applicant is not entitled for bail.

9. This Court had called for a report regarding the status of trial and in compliance thereof, a report has been submitted by the Trial Court concerned dated 11.08.2025. As per the said report, one witness has been examined to date.

10. The Supreme Court in case of
X Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.
reported in 2024 INSC 909, has held that once the trial has commenced, it should be allowed to reach to its final conclusion, which may either result in conviction or acquittal of the accused. The bail should not be normally granted to the accused after the charge has been framed. It should also not be granted by looking into the discrepancies here or there in the deposition.

11. The Supreme Court in
Ram Govind Upadhyay Vs Sudarshan Singh
(2002) 3 SCC 598 and Neeru Yadav Vs State of U.P. (2016) 15 SCC 422 has categorically opined that the power to grant bail under
Section 439
of Cr.P.C., is of wide amplitude. The court is bestowed with considerable but not unfettered discretion, which calls for exercise in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course and not in whimsical manner.

12.
In
Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Administration
), (1978) 1 SCC 118 it was held by the Supreme Court that the considerations in granting bail are the nature and gravity of the circumstances in which the offence is committed; the position and the status of the accused with reference to the victim and the witnesses; the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice; of repeating the offence; of jeopardising his own life being faced with a grim prospect of possible conviction in the case; of tampering with witnesses; the history of the case as well as of its investigation and other relevant grounds which, in view of so many valuable factors, cannot be exhaustively set out.

13. The same view was reiterated in State of U.P. v. Amarmani Tripathi (2005) 8 SCC 21;
Prahlad Singh Bhati vs. NCT of Delhi and Ors
(2001) 4 SCC 280;
Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar
(2020) 2 SCC 118;
Ms. Y v. State of Rajasthan and Anr.
2022 SCC OnLine SC 458;
Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. The State of U.P. and others
2022 SCC OnLine SC 89; Manoj Kumar Khokhar (2022) 3 SCC 501;
Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee and Anr.
(2010)14 SCC 496;
Ishwarji Mali v. State of Gujarat and another
2022 SCC OnLine SC 55;
Mahipal vs. Rajesh Kumar
(2020) 2 SCC 118;
Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. The State of U.P. and others
2022 SCC OnLine SC 89 and Deepak Yadav vs. State of U.P. and Anr. (2022)8 SCC 559.

14.
In
Ashok Dhankad v. State of NCT of Delhi & Another
2025 INSC 974, the Supreme Court while cancelling the bail granted by High Court held that the bail orders in grave criminal cases must be passed with caution, reflecting consideration of all relevant legal and factual circumstances, and are subject to appellate scrutiny for misapplication or oversight of such factors.

15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, aforesaid judgements of the Supreme Court and also considering the promptness of the FIR coupled by the fact that the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail.

16. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected.

17. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle
laid down in
the recent judgements 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.

18. 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.

Order Date :- 19.8.2025

Sumit S

(Justice Krishan Pahal)