Allahabad High Court
VIPINversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- SAMEER JAIN
Holding
The Court held that the applicant is entitled to bail.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Vipin, the husband of a deceased woman, who was accused under Sections 80(2) and 85 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act for dowry‑related offences. The applicant contended that the death was a suicide, citing the deceased's alleged short‑tempered nature, prior suicide attempts, and a post‑mortem report indicating death by hanging. The brother of the deceased, examined as a witness, corroborated the claim that no dowry‑related torture occurred and that the wife had a suicidal tendency. The State opposed bail but did not dispute these factual submissions. Noting the applicant's clean criminal record, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and the lack of evidentiary support for the prosecution’s claim, the Court granted bail with standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a dowry‑death case under Sections 80(2) and 85 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act when the death appears to be a suicide.
- Whether the presumption of guilt in dowry‑death offences can be overridden by evidence suggesting lack of dowry‑related torture.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 80(2), 85
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- presumption of guilt
- suicide
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9254 of 2026
Vipin
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohit Sharan Tomar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 67
HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.
1. Heard Sri Rohit Sharan Tomar, learned Advocate, holding brief of Sri
Mohit Sharan Tomar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay
Kumar, learned AGA, for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant
with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.940 of 2024,
under Sections 80(2) and 85 BNS and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act,
Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that however, applicant is the
husband of the deceased but on the basis of false allegation he has been
made accused in the present matter.
4. He further argued that actually deceased was not only short tempered
lady but she was also having suicidal tendency and even before marriage
she tried to commit suicide and after marriage also very often she became
hyper and on the date of incident again on minor issue she became hyper
and committed suicide by hanging. He next submits that even post
mortem report of the deceased suggests that she died due to hanging.
5. He further submits that even during trial informant of the case, i.e.,
brother of the deceased during cross examination did not support the
prosecution cae and even according to him, deceased was short tempered
lady and she was having suicidal tendency and statement of the informant
recorded during trial has been annexed along with the instant bail
application.
BAIL No. 9254 of 2026
2
6. He further submits that apart from the present case applicant is not
having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail
since 29.9.2024, i.e.,for almost one and half years.
7. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but
could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel
for the applicant.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of
the case.
9. However, applicant is the husband of the deceased and his wife died
within seven years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her
matrimonial home and there was also allegation of torture in connection
to demand of dowry but during trial informant of the case, i..e, brother of
the deceased in his cross examination did not support the prosecution
case and categorically stated that applicant and his family members never
tortured her for demand of dowry and also stated that deceased was
having suicidal tendency and due to this reason she committed suicide.
10. Further, even post mortem report of the deceased suggests that she
died due to hanging
11. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in
the present matter he is in jail since 29.9.2024,i.e.,for almost one and half
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 purposes.
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-Vipin 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,
BAIL No. 9254 of 2026
3
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 said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case
during trial.
(Sameer Jain,J.)
March 18, 2026
SKM
Digitally signed by :-
SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…