Allahabad High Court
RAJESH ANURAGIversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Rajesh Anuragi, accused under Sections 80(2) & 85 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in connection with the suicide of his wife. The applicant argued that no call‑detail records (CDR) linked him or his family to the deceased, that the investigation report found no dowry demand, and that he had no prior criminal record, making the presumption under Section 118 of the B.S.A. inapplicable. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the factual contentions. Weighing the lack of direct evidence, the nature of the offence, the applicant’s custody since 1 July 2026, and the policy considerations of overcrowded prisons, the Court relied on recent Supreme Court precedents (Kapil Wadhawan 2025, Maya Tiwari 2024, and the 2023 bail policy) and granted bail with standard conditions. The order directed verification of identity, surety bonds, and electronic transmission of the release order.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite being charged under the Dowry Prohibition Act and B.N.S. provisions.
- Whether the presumption under Section 118 of the B.S.A. applies in the absence of evidence of dowry demand.
- Whether the lack of CDR evidence and the applicant’s clean record justify bail during trial.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 80(2), 85
- B.S.A. — s. 118
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- dowry prohibition
- criminal procedure
- presumption under Section 118
- overcrowded prisons
- call detail records
- suicide
- false implication
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34953 of 2026
Rajesh Anuragi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bhaskar Bhadra, Rajveer Chaurasiya
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 66
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Bhaskar Bhadra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri
Roshan Kumar Singh, 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. 45 of 2026, Under Sections
80(2) & 85 B.N.S. & Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police
Station- Kharela, District Mahoba, during the pendency of the trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is
the husband of the deceased who committed suicide at her parental
house. It is further submitted that though the allegation has been
made that the applicant and his family members used to harass the
deceased over her mobile phone but police has not collected any
CDR showing any conversation between the applicant or any other
family members with the deceased. Therefore, applicant has been
falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the case diary shows
that the information was collected by the I.O. from the villagers and
as per that information, there was no issue regarding demand of
dowry and the deceased committed suicide over a petty issue at her
parental home, therefore, presumption u/s 118 of BSA does not
attract. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal
history. It is further submitted that charge sheet has been filed in the
present case, therefore, there is no requirement of custodial
BAIL No. 34953 of 2026
2
interrogation. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.07.2026. In
case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and
would cooperate in the trial proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. Considering the aforesaid submission and taking into account that
the deceased committed suicide at her parental house and there is
no CDR showing that the applicant or his family members has any
conversation with the deceased when the deceased was staying at
her parental home, coupled with the nature of allegation and keeping
in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and
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. reported in 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.
6. Let the applicant- Rajesh Anuragi, involved in the aforementioned
crime be released on bail, on his 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. 34953 of 2026
3
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the
bond executed by him.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a
ground for cancellation of bail.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be
verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
9. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as
well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant
through Mahoba Jail Superintendent 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.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
September 30, 2026
S.C.
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…