Shekhar Saini vs State Of Uttarakhand

Ashish Naithani, J

The present Bail Application has been moved by the applicant-Shekhar Saini, aged about 24 years (S/o Sh. Ramesh Chandra Saini, R/o Village Maheshpura, Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar) under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in connection with the FI R No. 228 of 2024, registered at Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

Heard Ms. Pushpa Joshi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Nipush Mola Joshi and Ms. Chetna Latwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. S.C. Dum ka, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of Uttarakhand.

The main contention as put before this Court on behalf of the applicant is that the complainant, who has lodged an FI R complaining a demand of dowry and thereby resulting in the death of deceased-Mithlesh, the wife of the applicant, has not supported the prosecution story later and as per the evidence so far, besides husband, there was a neighbor who saw her hung. The deceased and the applicant got married in the year 2021 and as per the record, the deceased committed suicide on 23.04.2024 and thereafter, the brother of the deceased-Ajay lodged an FI R on 26.04.2024.

The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.05.2024; and the applicant, therefore, prays that he may be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application and submitted that as per the averments made in the paragraph no. 8 of the counter affidavit, it has been stated that the deceased- Mithlesh was subjected to cruelty by her husband (present applicant) and as per the statements of the witnesses, who have categorically stated that soon after her marriage, within four years, she was subjected to cruelty and harassment in connection with demand of dowry particularly for Rs. 5,00,000/ - and it is evident from the FI R and also the statements recorded by the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Further, it is stated that the cause of death of the Mithlesh, as per the autopsy report, is asphyxia ante-mortem hanging, and for the above reasons, bail grounds are not sufficient.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. At this stage, I find it a fit case for bail on two grounds, firstly, the complainant/ brother of the deceased has not supported the facts that he has reported in the FI R, and, secondly, ever since the deceased-Mithlesh got married to the applicant; there are no complaints of dowry reported anywhere; and, at this juncture, without going into the merits, I find it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on bail.

Having regard to the above discussions, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. The Bail Application is allowed.

Let the applicant – Shekhar Saini be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.