Allahabad High Court
SURAJ KALIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The court granted bail to the applicant, holding that she is entitled to release on bail pending trial.
Summary
The applicant, Suraj Kali, the mother‑in‑law of a woman who died by suicide, was implicated in a dowry‑death case (Crime No. 205 of 2026) under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the IPC, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. She contended that the allegations were vague, that there was no material to establish cruelty or a dowry demand, and that the charge‑sheet had already been filed, rendering custodial interrogation unnecessary. The State, represented by the Advocate General, opposed bail but did not dispute the factual background. The court, considering the nature of the offence, the lack of incriminating evidence, the applicant’s clean record, and the policy of decongesting prisons, referred to the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Kapil Wadhawan and Maya Tiwari. Relying on these precedents, the judge held that the applicant was entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail application was allowed subject to a personal bond, sureties and standard conditions. The order also directed electronic transmission of the bail order to the jail and trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under the applicable provisions given the nature of the alleged dowry‑death offence.
- Whether the presumption of dowry death under Sections 80(2) and 85 IPC is attracted in the present facts.
- Whether the applicant’s lack of prior criminal record and the existence of a charge‑sheet justify grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 480
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 80(2), 85
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- presumption of dowry death
- Indian Penal Code
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- overcrowded prisons
- suicide
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34028 of 2026
Suraj Kali
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Karunesh Pratap Singh, Shivam Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Karunesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Rakesh Kumar Mishra, 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 in Case Crime No. 205 of 2026, under Sections 80(2), 85
BNS and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kaundhiyara, District
Prayagraj, during the pendency of the trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is
the mother-in-law of the deceased, who committed suicide by hanging
herself after a petty dispute over household issues. The applicant has been
falsely implicated merely being the mother-in-law of the deceased, though
there is no sufficient material against her to show that she harassed the
deceased for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry prior to her 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 seven years of marriage, there must be sufficient
material to show that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before
her death, but there is no such material.
4. It is lastly submitted that charge-sheet has been filed by the police,
therefore, there is no requirement for custodial interrogation. It is further
submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and being a lady, she
BAIL No. 34028 of 2026
2
is entitled to be released on bail in view of Section 480 BNSS. The
applicant is a law abiding citizen and she is languishing in jail since
09.07.2026. In case, she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of
bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions
of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that
applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased 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 as well as
guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P.,
2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail 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 present
application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant- Suraj Kali, involved in the aforementioned crime be
released on bail, on her 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.
BAIL No. 34028 of 2026
3
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by her.
8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for
cancellation of bail.
9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
10. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as
well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of
computer generated copy of this order, downloaded 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.
12. It is further 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.
13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through
Jail Superintendent, Naini, Prayagraj 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.
14. Application, if any, stands disposed of.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
September 23, 2026
SA
Digitally signed by :-
SALMAN ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…