Allahabad High Court

SHEETALversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 5 May 2026
Bench: SAMEER JAIN

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail as the alleged illicit relationship does not attract the dowry‑death provision and she has no prior criminal record.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Sheetal, accused in a dowry‑death case (Criminal Case No. 508 of 2025) alleging that she and the husband of the deceased had an illicit relationship which led the daughter to commit suicide. The prosecution argued that the accused were principal perpetrators of dowry death, while the defence contended that the suicide was not caused by dowry demands and thus does not fall under Section 304B, at most attracting Section 108 of the IPC. The court noted that the in‑laws of the deceased had already been released on bail and that the applicant had no prior criminal record and had been in custody for over five months. Relying on Sections 80(2) and 85 of the CrPC, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the court found merit in the argument that the alleged illicit relationship does not constitute dowry death. Consequently, the court granted bail to Sheetal subject to a personal bond and sureties with standard conditions, limiting its observations to the bail application and not prejudicing the trial.

Issues considered

Whether the alleged illicit relationship leading to suicide falls within the definition of dowry death under the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the CrPC despite the seriousness of the allegations.
Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and gender are relevant factors for granting bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 80(2), 85
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 108

Subjects

dowry death
bail
illicit relationship
suicide
CrPC
Dowry Prohibition Act
Section 108 IPC

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15361 of 2026

Sheetal
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Danish, Rajiv Sisodia
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 66
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. Heard Sri Shashank Dwivedi, Advocate, holding brief of Sri
Rajeev Sisodia, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Veer Pal
Singh, learned counsel for informant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra
Bahadur Singh, learned AGA for the State.

2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 508 of 2025, under Sections
80(2), 85 B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Khoda,
District Ghaziabad, during pendency of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is Jethani
of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation she has been
made accused in the present matter along with other including
husband of the deceased, father-in-law of the deceased Vashudev
and mother-in-law of deceased, Vimla Devi and father-in-law and
mother-in-law of the deceased have been released on bail by this
Court vide order dated 27.01.2026 and 10.03.2026 passed in Crl.
Misc. Bail Application No. 7905 of 2026 and 8005 of 2026
respectively and case of the applicant is on better footing than
them.

4. He next submits, from the bail granting order of in-laws of the
deceased it reflects after considering the fact that deceased was
having doubt that applicant was having illicit relationship with her
Bhabhi, i.e. applicant she committed suicide and the fact that
applicant was having illicit relationship with his Bhabhi was also
evident from the statement of mother of the deceased.

5. He further submits even if husband of deceased was having
illicit relationship with the applicant and if due to this reason
deceased committed suicide then also applicant cannot be held
responsible for her dowry death and at the worst she may be
BAIL No. 15361 of 2026
2

prosecuted for offence under Section 108 B.N.S.

6. He further argued, applicant is lady and she is not having any
previous criminal history and in the present matter, she is in jail
since 30.11.2025 i.e. for last more than five months.

7. Per contra, learned AGA as well as counsel for the informant
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submit husband of the
deceased and applicant are the principal accused who were having
illicit relationship and due to their illicit relationship deceased had to
commit suicide but they fairly conceded that if due to illicit
relationship of her husband a wife committed suicide then this does
not attract the provision of dowry death. They also could not
dispute the fact that in-laws of the deceased have already been
released on bail and applicant is a lady and is not having any other
criminal history and she is in jail for last more than five months.

8. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused
the record of the case.

9. However,F.I.R. of the present case was lodged by the informant
with regard to the allegation that applicant and other accused
caused dowry death of her daughter as they used to torture her for
demand of dowry but during investigation it was revealed that
husband of the deceased was having illicit relationship with the
applicant and due to this reason she committed suicide and after
considering this fact in-laws of the deceased have been enlarged
on bail.

10. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned
counsel for the applicant that even if due to illicit relationship of the
applicant with the husband of the deceased if she committed
suicide then it does not attracts the provisions of dowry death
though at the worst applicant may be prosecuted along with the
husband of the deceased for offence punishable under Section 108
BNS.

11. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and she is
lady and she is in jail for last more than five months.

12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case
discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on
bail.

13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

14. Let the applicant -Sheetal be released on bail in the aforesaid
BAIL No. 15361 of 2026
3

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 her 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.

15. 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.

16. 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.

(Sameer Jain,J.)
May 6, 2026
Kumar Manish

Digitally signed by :-
MANISH TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…