Allahabad High Court
Diwakar Maurya vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 28 April, 2026
Author: Manish Mathur
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:30341
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 282 of 2026
Diwakar Maurya
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s)
:
Tushar Gupta, Mohd. Kashif Rafi, Pankaj Gupta
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
G.A., Amritesh Kumar Tripathi, Parth Srivastava
Court No. - 12
HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and Mr. Amritesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
2. Objections filed on behalf of complainant and rejoinder filed on behalf of appellant are taken on record.
3. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with a prayer to set aside order dated 01.01.2026 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow on Bail Application No.10574/2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 254 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 108, 352, 81, 84 BNS [corresponding Sections 323, 306, 504, 493, 498 IPC] & Sections 3(2)(5), 3(1)?, ? of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow rejecting bail to appellant.
4. As per contents of First Information Report, the appellant stands accused of enticing away the sister of complainant on false pretext of marriage. It is stated that the appellant alongwith sister of complainant thereafter were living together in a rented accommodation and on 13.05.2025 the appellant allegedly murdered the sister of complainant and hanged her body on unfulfilled dowry demand.
5. Learned counsel for appellant submits that he has been falsely implicated on allegations levelled against him particularly in view of the fact that charges have been framed under Section 306 IPC [corresponding Section 108 BNS] alongwith other Sections and not under Section 498-A IPC [corresponding Section 85 BNS] or 304-B IPC [corresponding Section 80 BNS]. It is further submitted that neither in the First Information Report nor even in the statement of complainant recorded subsequently has any aspect been indicated of harassment or instigation for a deceased to commit suicide or that any harassment or instigation was proximate to the suicide. It is therefore submitted that the appellant does not come within the meaning of term 'abettor' under Section 108 IPC [corresponding 46 BNS] particularly conditions indicated in Section 107 IPC [corresponding Section 45 BNS] were not made out. It is submitted that the appellant without any previous criminal history is under incarceration since 14.05.2025 with trial only at very inception.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has opposed the appeal with submission that the appellant had clearly enticed away the sister of complainant on false pretext of marriage and was thereafter instrumental in her death in view of unfulfilled dowry demand. it is submitted that the aspects clearly indicate applicability of conditions indicated in Sections 498-A [corresponding Section 85 BNS] read Section 304-B IPC [corresponding Section 80 BNS]. Learned counsel has also adverted to a purported letter written by the deceased on 30.05.2024 to the police station concerned indicating harassment at the instance of appellant.
7. Learned Additional Government Advocate while reiterating the aforesaid objections and however admits that there is no previous criminal history of appellant.
8. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, at this stage, without entering into the merits of case and subject to evidence in trial, it appears that as per F.I.R., allegation levelled is of appellant being instrumental in the death of sister of complainant on account of unfulfilled dowry demand but charge-sheet has been filed and charges have been framed not under Sections 498-A [corresponding Section 85 BNS] read Section 304-B IPC [corresponding Section 80 BNS] but under Section 306 IPC [corresponding Section 108 BNS] read with other four Sections. Neither the F.I.R. nor the statement of complainant at this stage indicate any harassment or instigation by the appellant in the deceased committing suicide. The aspect therefore in terms of Section 107 IPC [corresponding Section 45 BNS] would require to be examined by the trial court by corroborating evidence to bring the appellant within the meaning of an abettor under Section 108 IPC [corresponding Section 46 BNS]. The aspect of any letter written by the deceased just prior to her demise would also require to be corroborated by evidence during trial and cannot be considered at this stage. The appellant without any previous criminal history is under incarceration since 14.05.2025 with trial at the very inception.
9. In view of what has been stated above, I am of the view that the learned Court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the Court below is liable to be set aside.
10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated 01.01.2026 is set aside.
11. Let appellant/applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 appellant/applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial
(ii) The appellant/applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The appellant/applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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.
(iv) The appellant/applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.
(v) The appellant/applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).
(vi) In case, the appellant/applicant misuses the liberty of ball during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the appellant/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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).
12. Pending applications if any too stand disposed of.
(Manish Mathur,J.) April 28, 2026 lakshman