Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114392 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37137 of 2024 Applicant :- Smt. Usha Mavi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ayush Mishra,Bipin,Prabha Shanker Mishra,Sanjeev Kumar Singh,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- Mohd. Afzal,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Bipin Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Varun Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No. 348 of 2024, under Sections 80, 85, 115(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Shalimar Garden, District-Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the son of the applicants was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 21.04.2022 and subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the victim to cruelty for demand of Rs. 30,00,000/- as dowry, thereby leading her to death on 05.07.2024 at about 8:45 AM. It is also alleged that an amount of Rs. 18,00,000/- was transferred to the accounts of the applicants through several transactions. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that the applicants are absolutely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicants are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased person and they have nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about eight hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The cause of death is Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. It is further submitted that the said money was transferred to the accounts of the applicant for business transactions and has nothing to do with the demand of dowry, as such,the applicants are entitled for bail. 6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicants that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicants. The applicants are languishing in jail since 08.08.2024 and they are ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that account statement has been filed as Annexure No. CA-6 to the counter affidavit and there is no rebuttal of the said allegations, as such, it is an open and shut case. The FIR is also prompt and the deceased has been put to death out of the demand of dowry, as such applicants are not entitled for bail. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that FIR is prompt and there is proof that Rs. 18,00,000/- was transferred to the accounts of the applicants through various transactions, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicants. 9. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 11. 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 :- 15.7.2025 Karan (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad