Allahabad High Court
MUNNARversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Munnar, the father‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant argued that he was falsely implicated, that there was no material to support a presumption of dowry death, and that a co‑accused had already been released on bail, establishing parity. The State opposed bail but could not refute the factual background. Relying on the need to decongest jails, the nature of the offence, and precedents such as Kapil Wadhawan v CBI, the court held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to standard conditions and verification of sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the presumption of dowry death applies in the present case.
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Sections 85 and 80(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether parity with a co‑accused who obtained bail warrants bail for the applicant.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita — s. 80(2), 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- presumption of dowry death
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- parity
- overcrowded jails
- suicide
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10047 of 2026
Munnar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Shukla, Saroj Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ambuj Kumar Mishra, G.A., Vineet
Kumar Sharma
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raj
Kumar Yadav, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vineet Kumar Sharma,
counsel of the first informant, Sri Bhupendra Pal Singh, learned A.G.A. for
the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the
applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.173 of 2025, under
Section 85, 80(2) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 3/4 Dowry
Prohibition Act, Police Station Karma, District Sonbhadra.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is
father-in-law of the deceased, who committed suicide by hanging after a
petty dispute over household issues. The applicant has been falsely
implicated merely being father-in-law of the deceased, though there is no
sufficient material against him to show that he harassed the deceased for
non-fulfillment of demand of dowry prior to death. The applicant has been
falsely implicated by making general and vague allegations along with other
family members. It is further submitted that for invoking presumption of
dowry death in case of death under unnatural circumstances within 7 years
of marriage, there must be sufficient material to show that the deceased was
subjected to cruelty soon before the death, but there is no such material. It is
further submitted that co-accused Gulabi Devi (mother-in-law of the
deceased) has already been released on bail by this Court in Criminal
Misc. Bail Application No. 9989 of 2026 vide order dated 01.09.2026.
BAIL No. 10047 of 2026
2
Therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail on the
ground of parity. It is lastly submitted that charge sheet has been filed by the
police, therefore, there is no requirement for custodial interrogation. The
applicant has explained the criminal history of two cases in supplementary
affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 17.12.2025. In case, he is granted
bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial
proceedings.
4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
5. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties and also keeping in view the nature of
offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and also taking into account
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial
courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex
Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation
reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 and without expressing any opinion
on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to
be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant- Munnar involved in the aforementioned crime be
released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in
the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following
conditions:-
i. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat
or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer
or tamper with the evidence.
ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without
seeking any adjournment.
iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of
any crime after being released on bail.
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond
executed by him.
BAIL No. 10047 of 2026
3
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
9. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
downloaded copy of this order from the official website of High Court
Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that
the certified copy will be filed within 15 days.
10. It is directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the
concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure
early release of the applicant.
11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or on e-prison portal and Trial
Court via e-mode within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex
Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu
Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024)
10 SCC 685 as well as Pila Pahan @ Peela Pahan and others Vs. State of
Jharkhand and another, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 169 of 2025,
decided on 29.05.2026.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
September 23, 2026
CS/-
Digitally signed by :-
CHANDAN SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…