Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Mahesh Chandra Pathak – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Samit Gopal, J.
1. List revised.
2. Sri Hemant Kumar Patel, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ravi Shankar Tripathi, Advocate appears for the first informant and filed vakalatnama today in Court which is taken on record.
3. Heard Sri Tarun Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
4. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure /483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Mahesh Chandra Pathak, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 437 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80, 49 BNS and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Bisauli, District Budaun.
5. Learned counsel for the State submits that he has received instructions for which time was granted to him vide order dated 05.03.2025.
6. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 08.09.2024 by Saurabh Sharma against the applicant and three other persons alleging therein that his sister Rachna @ Meenakshi was married to Prashant Pathak the son of the applicant on 18.02.2018 in which he had given gifts as per status but the accused persons were demanding a Wagon R car in dowry due to which the
The court denied bail based on serious allegations of murder and dowry harassment, supported by evidence of strangulation and violence against the deceased.
Hints at the grave implications of dowry-related murders and the judicial emphasis on denying bail in such cases.
The severity of the offence and the accused's capability of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses are crucial factors in deciding the grant of bail in cases of dowry death.
The court emphasized the necessity of a proximate nexus between dowry-related harassment and the death of the deceased for invoking Section 304B IPC.
The court emphasized that granting bail in dowry death cases undermines public confidence in justice and violates the legislative intent behind IPC sections pertaining to dowry-related offenses.
Bail cannot be denied based solely on allegations without substantial evidence; the presumption of innocence prevails.
The timing and specificity of allegations, completion of investigation, and framing of charges are crucial factors in considering bail applications in cases involving dowry demands and harassment.
The court emphasized the victim's right to justice over the accused's right to bail, confirming that evidence presented established prima facie grounds for dowry harassment leading to suicide.
The presumption of a 'dowry death' under Section 304B IPC should be tested in trial and is meant to act as a deterrent to the demand of dowry.
The court emphasized the necessity of a proximate link between alleged harassment for dowry and the subsequent death, rejecting bail on grounds of serious accusations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhit....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
