Allahabad High Court
ANGAD NISHADversusState of U.P.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits
- Bench
- SIDDHARTH
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted in the present dowry death case.
Summary
The applicant, Angad Nishad, sought bail in a criminal case (Crime No. 172 of 2023) involving charges under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, alleging dowry harassment and dowry death. The applicant argued that he had been in custody since June 10, 2023, only three witnesses had been examined, and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, also contending that no post‑mortem was conducted. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the dowry death allegation, the absence of a post‑mortem, and the disposal of the deceased's body by the accused. The High Court, after considering the submissions and the nature of the accusations, declined to grant bail, directing the trial court to expedite the trial and allowing the applicant to move for bail if the trial exceeds one year. The bail application was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a dowry death case under Sections 498‑A, 304‑B, 201 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act despite the seriousness of the allegations and lack of post‑mortem evidence.
- Whether the delay in trial proceedings justifies the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 304-B, 498-A
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- criminal trial delay
- Section 498-A
- Section 304-B
- Section 201
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15433 of 2024
Angad Nishad
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kunwar Rajeshwar Vikram, Sher
Bahadur Yadav, Uday Narain Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. Heard Shri Kunwar Rajeshwar Vikram, learned counsel for the
applicant and Sri B.P. Maurya, learned AGA for the State.
2. The present application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime no.
172 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4
of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Ahraula, District Azamgarh,
with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on
bail.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is
languishing in jail since 10.06.2023 and only three witnesses have been
examined so far and the trial is not likely to conclude in near future. It is
further submitted that as per first information report, the applicant and co-
accused persons are said to have harassed the daughter of the first
informant in connection with demand of dowry and the offence of dowry
death is said to have been committed by the applicant and other co-
accused persons. It is further submitted that no postmortem of the dead
body of the deceased was conducted, however, the information was given
by the applicant to the first informant and the police.
4. On the other hand, learned AGA for the State has opposed the
application for bail and it has been submitted by him that the applicant did
not inform the police and the first informant and no postmortem of the
dead body was conducted and the applicant and co-accused persons are
said to have harassed the daughter of the first informant in connection
BAIL No. 15433 of 2024
2
with demand of dowry and the deceased has been subjected to dowry
death.
5. As per first information report, the applicant and co-accused persons
are said to have committed the dowry death and the wife of the applicant
has died in the alleged incident, however, no postmortem report of the
dead body was conducted and the dead body of the deceased was
disposed of by the applicant and co-accused persons after her death.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of
learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation and without
expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to
the applicant.
7. The bail application is dismissed.
8. However, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as
expeditiously as possible. If the trial is not concluded within one year, the
applicant shall be at liberty to move before this Court for grant of bail.
Provided that applicant cooperates in the trial.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
May 12, 2026
RKM
Digitally signed by :-
RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…