HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32855 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record. By means of this bail application, applicant Shaivaj, who is involved in Case Crime No. 384 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80(2), 115(2) BNS and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Akrabad, district Aligarh, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. As per prosecution case, in brief, complainant Danish, who is brother of the deceased Muskan, got an F.I.R. lodged on 16.07.2024 against Shaivaj, Sharif, Chuniya and Salim, who are husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased, respectively, stating inter alia that marriage of his sister Muskan was solemnized on 29.06.2024 with the applicant Shaivaj but after marriage, there was consistent demand of one motorcycle, gold chain and gold ring in dowry from the side of the accused persons. On 14.07.2024, when he expressed his inability to fulfill their demand, his sister was done to death on 15.07.2024. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is husband of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation of demand of dowry is false and against the evidence on record. Much emphasis has been given by contending that before the trial Court, the complainant Danish and Kasim, who are brother and father of the deceased have been examined as PWs-1 and 2 on 24.07.2025 and 19.08.2025 but they in their examination-in-chief did not support the prosecution case and at the request of the prosecution, they have been declared hostile, therefore, there Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kashi Naresh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shaivaj .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) is bleak chance of conviction of the applicant. The applicant, who does not have any criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 31.07.2024, may be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but does not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that complainant Danish and Kasim, who are brother and father of the deceased did not support the prosecution case before the trial Court as noted above, hence in the light of their statements, the applicant has made out a prima facie case for bail. Hence, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. Let the applicant Shaivaj be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail. September 24, 2025 / Shubham BAIL No. 32855 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad