Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27300 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2497 of 2025 Applicant :- Tahir Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kumar Dhananjay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Shahnawaz Shah Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Kumar Dhananjay, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Nuruddin, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Syed Shahnawaz Shah, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 682 of 2024, under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 108 B.N.S., Police Station Murad Nagar, District Ghaziabad during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and his family members on 15.09.2024 and according to the FIR marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the sister of the informant on 30.03.2011 and after marriage applicant and his family members tortured her for demand of dowry and due to their torture on 10.09.2024 she committed suicide by hanging herself. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is husband of the deceased but on the basis of false allegation, he has been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further submits, deceased died on 10.09.2024 but FIR of the present case was lodged on 15.09.2024 i.e. after five days and this delay in the lodging the FIR itself suggests that FIR of the present case is based on false facts. 6. He further submits, in the FIR informant made allegation that due to the demand of dowry applicant and his family members tortured the deceased, therefore, deceased committed suicide but in his statement recorded during investigation he changed the version of the FIR and stated that applicant and his family members kept the deceased in Parda and only due to this reason they tortured her and on 08.09.2024 when she attended the marriage then her face was visible to all, therefore, they scolded her and therefore she committed suicide and this fact clearly suggests that actually there is no cogent evidence of abetment against the applicant on record and only being husband of the deceased, he has been made accused in the present matter. 7. 7. He further submits, actually relationship of the deceased with her family members was not cordial and only due to this reason some dispute arose between them and thereafter she hanged herself. 8. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 26.09.2024. 9. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted applicant is husband of the deceased and as he used to torture the deceased, therefore, it cannot be said that there is no cogent evidence of abetment against the applicant on record but they could not dispute the fact that there is delay of five days in lodging the FIR of the present case. 10. They further could not dispute the fact that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 26.09.2024 i.e. for last more than five months. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, applicant is husband of the deceased but it reflects, there is delay of five days in lodging the FIR of the present case. Further, there are material contradictions in the version of the FIR and in the statement of the informant recorded during investigation with regard to cause of torture. 13. Further, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no cogent evidence of abetment against the applicant on record. 14. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 26.09.2024. 15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant - Tahir be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 18. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 19. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad