Allahabad High Court

VINOD KUMARversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: SAMIT GOPAL

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail subject to stringent conditions.

Summary

The High Court considered a second bail application filed by Vinod Kumar, who is alleged to be involved in a dowry‑related case concerning the death of his daughter‑in‑law Seema. The applicant claimed false implication, noting that the cause of death was asphyxia due to antemortem hanging and that the suicide note made no accusation against him. The court observed that the mother‑in‑law and husband of the deceased had already been granted bail, and there was no material suggesting evidence tampering or a risk of interference with the trial. After evaluating the nature of the evidence and the applicant’s criminal history, the court concluded that bail could be enlarged. Accordingly, the applicant was released on bail subject to a personal bond, two sureties and a series of strict conditions aimed at preventing tampering, harassment, and unnecessary adjournments.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant Vinod Kumar is entitled to bail under Section 483 of the BNSS Act in view of the allegations under Sections 85, 80(2) of the BNS Act and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Whether the existence of prior bail to related family members and the nature of the evidence justify denial of bail.
Whether there is a likelihood of the applicant tampering with evidence or influencing the trial.

Legislation cited

Bail and Surrender (BNSS) Act — s. 209, 269, 351, 483, 84
BNS Act — s. 80(2), 85
Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4

Subjects

bail
dowry prohibition
false implication
suicide
asphyxia
evidence tampering
trial conditions
sureties

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39722 of 2025

Vinod Kumar
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sandhya Chaturvedi, Ansar Ahmad,
Mukesh Kumar Pandey, Rajnish Kumar
Srivastava, Siddharth Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 76
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar Pandey and Ms. Sandhya Chaturvedi,
learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for
the State and perused the material on record.

3. This second bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by
the applicant Vinod Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in
connection with Case Crime No. 287 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2)
BNS and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at P.S. Phaphood,
District Auraiya.

4. The first bail application of the applicant being Criminal Misc. Bail
Application No. 37966 of 2025 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order
dated 31.10.2025.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued as follows:

(i) The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

(ii) The applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased Seema.

(iii) The marriage of the deceased Seema was solemnized with Neeraj son
of the applicant on 15.04.2022.

(iv) General and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the
applicant.

(v) Postmortem examination report shows the cause of death is asphyxia
as a result of antemortem hanging with single ligature mark.
BAIL No. 39722 of 2025
2

(vi) Mithlesh Kumari the mother-in-law of the deceased has been granted
bail by this Court vide order dated 14.11.2025 passed in Criminal Misc.
Bail Application No.39801 of 2025, copy of the said order has been
produced before the Court for the same which is taken on record.

(vii) Neeraj the husband of the deceased has also been granted bail by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.1.2026 passed in
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.39801 of 2025, copy of the said order
has been produced before the Court for the same which is taken on record.

(viii) The applicant has criminal history of one case which has been
disclosed and explained in para-33 and 34 of the affidavit.

(ix) The suicide note of the deceased also does not cast any allegation
against the applicant or any of the accused.

(x) The applicant is in jail since 15.8.2025.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the
records, it is evident that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased.
The mother-in-law and husband of the deceased have been granted bail.
The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. The
suicide note of the deceased also does not cast any allegation against the
applicant or any of the accused.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of
evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the
possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that
the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant Vinod Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid
case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the
following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not
harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on
every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner
whatsoever.

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not
seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses
are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open
for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in
accordance with law.
BAIL No. 39722 of 2025
3

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner
whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial
and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS,
2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the
date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate
proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS,
2023.

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on
dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3)
recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. If in the opinion
of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without
sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such
default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance
with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269
BNS, 2023.

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to
conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by
court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned
above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the
applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(Samit Gopal,J.)
September 30, 2026
Naresh

Digitally signed by :-
NARESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…