Allahabad High Court
ATENDRAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Atendra, who is accused under Sections 498A, 304B, 323 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in connection with the death of his wife, alleged to be a suicide. The applicant’s counsel argued that the allegations were false, that the post‑mortem report indicated death by hanging, and that the accused has no prior criminal record despite having been in custody for almost two years. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual contentions raised by the applicant. The Court noted the presumption of innocence, the lack of a criminal history, and the possibility that the death was a suicide, and therefore found no reason to deny bail. Consequently, the Court granted bail subject to a personal bond, sureties, and conditions restricting tampering with evidence or further criminal activity.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged under Sections 498A, 304B, 323 IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act pending trial.
- Whether the alleged suicide of the deceased and the absence of a criminal record justify bail.
- Whether the duration of pre‑trial detention and the seriousness of the charges preclude bail.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304B, 323, 498A
Subjects
- bail
- IPC
- 498A
- 304B
- 323
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- suicide
- presumption of innocence
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal history
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30920 of 2025
Atendra
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shambhawi Shukla, Sunil Vishal Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sandeep Kumar Prajapati, Umesh
Singh
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Case called out in revised list. None present on behalf of informant.
2. Heard Miss Shambhawi Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri
Ashutosh Singh, learned AGA for the State.
3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant
on bail in Case Crime No. 224 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 323 IPC
and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Thakurdwara, District Moradabad
during pendency of the trial.
4. 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.
5. She further submits, after marriage with regard to property some dispute
arose between husband and wife and thereafter in rash she committed
suicide by hanging and after her death informant on the basis of false
allegation lodged FIR of the present case. She further submits, even post
mortem report suggests that deceased died due to hanging.
6. She further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in
the present matter he is in jail since 20.05.2024 i.e. for almost two years.
7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute
the argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the
case.
BAIL No. 30920 of 2025
2
9. However, applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within
two years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial
home and there is also allegation of torture in connection to demand of Rs. 5
lakhs and four wheeler but post mortem report suggests that deceased died
due to hanging, therefore, possibility of suicide committed by the deceased
at this stage cannot be ruled out.
10. Further, considering the suggestion given to PW-1 before the trial court,
the defence taken by the applicant with regard to suicide committed by the
deceased at this stage also cannot be ruled out.
11. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present
matter he is in jail since 20.05.2024 i.e. for almost two years.
12. 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.
13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed
above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
the instant bail application is allowed.
15. Let the applicant - Atendra 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.
16. 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.
17. 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
BAIL No. 30920 of 2025
3
said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
March 19, 2026
AK Pandey
(Sameer Jain,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…