Allahabad High Court
SHIVAM YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered a bail application filed by Shivam Yadav, accused in a dowry‑related death case (Crime No. 0125 of 2025) under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant contended that his wife died by suicide, supported by an autopsy report showing an intact hyoid bone and no other injuries, and that key witnesses, including the deceased's parents and brother, turned hostile. The prosecution was unable to dispute these factual submissions. While noting the applicant’s prior minor offences under IPC sections 323, 504 and 506, the court held that the presumption of innocence and the weakened prosecution case warranted bail. Accordingly, the court granted bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a dowry‑death case where the post‑mortem suggests suicide.
- Whether the accused's prior minor offences under IPC affect the bail decision.
- Whether hostile witnesses undermine the prosecution's case sufficiently to justify bail.
- Application of Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. and Dowry Prohibition Act provisions in granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 80(2), 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- suicide
- presumption of innocence
- hostile witnesses
- prior criminal history
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14993 of 2026
Shivam Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prashant Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Prashant Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
Kunwar Tejandra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant
on bail in Case Crime No. 0125 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85 BNS and
Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Bhoganipur, District Kanpur Dehat
during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is husband
of the deceased but on the basis of false allegation he has been made accused
in the present matter. He further submits, actually marriage of the applicant
was solemnized with the deceased in January, 2020 and though with the
wedlock of applicant she begot a female child but she wanted male child and
therefore she was under depression and tension and applicant was not ready
for second child and only due to this reason very often dispute arose between
husband and wife and ultimately she could not cope up with the depression
and tension and committed suicide by hanging.
4. He next submits, even as per autopsy surgeon deceased died due to
hanging and apart from the ligature mark deceased did not sustain any
injury. He further submits, even hyoid bone of the deceased was found
intact, therefore, prima facie post mortem report shows, it is a case of
suicidal death.
5. He further submits, even during trial parents of the deceased did not
support the prosecution case and they have been declared hostile. He further
BAIL No. 14993 of 2026
2
submits, however, brother of the deceased i.e. informant of the case in his
examination-in-chief supported the prosecution case but during cross-
examination he also did not support the prosecution case and statements of
these witnesses have been annexed along with instant bail application.
6. He further submits, apart from the present case applicant is also having
criminal history of one another case but that case relates to minor offences
relating to Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC.
7. He further submits, in the present matter applicant is in jail
since15.04.2025 i.e. for last more than a year.
8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute
the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.
10. However, applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within
five and half years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her
matrimonial home and there was also allegation of torture for demand of
four wheeler and Rs. 5 lakhs but it appears, during trial parents of the
deceased did not support the prosecution case and have been declared
hostile. Further, even informant of the case i.e. brother of the deceased also
during his cross-examination did not support the prosecution case.
11. Further, post mortem report of the deceased suggests that deceased died
due to hanging and apart from the ligature mark deceased did not sustain any
injury and her hyoid bone was found intact, therefore, prima facie it appears
to be a case of suicidal death.
12. Further, apart from the present case applicant is however having criminal
history of one another case but that case relates to minor offences relating to
Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC.
13. Further, in the present matter applicant is in jail since15.04.2025 i.e. for
last more than a year.
14. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to
be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed either for punitive
or preventive purpose.
BAIL No. 14993 of 2026
3
15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed
above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
17. Let the applicant - Shivam Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid
case on 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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless
his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper
with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
18. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be
at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the
bail of the applicant.
19. 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.
May 5, 2026
AK Pandey
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…