The court granted bail to the appellant due to time served and the ambiguous nature of evidence regarding the death, while establishing principles regarding bail in dowry death cases.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)

7 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant in Cr. App (SJ) No. 4027 of 2024, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Since in this appeal the sentence awarded to the appellant is only eight years, the proviso to Section 389 (1) is not attracted still we have heard learned counsel for informant who is present.

2. The records have been placed before this Court in Cr. App (SJ) No. 4027 of 2024 together with Cr. App (DB) No.

1068 of 2024.

3. In Cr. App (SJ) No. 4027 of 2024 the appellant is the husband of the deceased who has been convicted vide judgment dated 20.07.2024 and sentenced vide order dated 24.07.2024 by learned Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Sessions Trial No. 694 of 2022 arising out of Jurawanpur P.S. Case No. 46 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Section 304B of the I.P.C. and has been ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for eight years.

4. Cr. App (DB) No. 1068 of 2024 has been filed on behalf of the victim under proviso to Section 372 Cr.P.C. against the acquittal of the husband of the charges under Section 302 /34 of the I.P.C. and Section 120B of the IPC. The Cr. App (DB) No. 1068 of 2024 has been admitted for hearing vide order dated

03.10.2024 passed in the said appeal.

5. At this stage, this Court is only concerned with the prayer of the appellant in Cr. App (SJ) No. 4027 of 2024 seeking suspension of his sentence and release on bail during pendency of the appeal.

6. The appellant has been prosecuted for the alleged dowry death of his wife.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the informant came to know about the death of his sister on 23.05.2020 at 06:00. A.M., however, he lodged the FIR after participating in the funeral only after more than 12 hrs. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that from the evidence of the Doctor (PW-4), it would appear that it is a case of hanging and the Doctor has been opined that no injury has been found either in the inquest report or in the postmortem report of the deceased. Learned counsel submits that the Doctor has found that the injury on the back lumber area only suggest that it was caused due to fall after hanging.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant has already remained in jail for five years and nine months as against his total sentence of eight years. This appeal is of the year 2024 and by no stretch of imagination it is likely to be heard in next couple of years.

10. Learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State have opposed the prayer of the appellant for suspension of his sentence and release on bail. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant both do not contest the submission that the appellant has already remained in jail for five years and nine months as against his sentence of eight years and this appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, they have submitted that it is a case of dowry death in which the appellant has been found guilty and because of the said finding of the guilt he does not deserve the privilege of suspension of sentence and release on bail.

11. Having regard to the entire materials available on the record which we have prima facie gone through at this stage, on noticing the opinion of the Doctor (PW-4) saying that it may be case of suicidal or homicidal and that the appellant has already remained in jail for five years nine months approximately as against the sentence of eight years and the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, we direct suspension of sentence and release of the appellant in Cr. App (SJ) 4027 of 2024 on bail during pendency of the appeal on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the s