Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110679 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39381 of 2024 Applicant :- Seema Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhijit Kumar,Bharat Singh Pal,Saurabh Kesarwani Counsel for Opposite Party :- Abhishek Tiwari,G.A.,Mahendra Pratap Singh,Sandeep Kumar Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Saurabh Kesarwani, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Mahendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0099 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 307, 323, 504 of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Manda, District - Yamuna Nagar (Commissionerate Prayagraj), during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of nephew of the applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant as per Hindu Rites on 20.05.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for a demand of Rs. 02 lakhs as dowry. The victim is stated to have set afire by the applicant and other family members leading her to death on 08.05.2024 at about 11:00 PM. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is the aunt-in-law (chachiya saas) of the deceased person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about 17 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the applicant lives separately to the other family members, as such, she has been falsely implicated in the case. The name of the applicant has come up subsequently in a doctored video recording of the deceased person which depicts that the applicant was also involved in setting her afire. Prior to it, there are two documents which indicate that the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. 7. Learned counsel has placed much reliance on an application given by the deceased person herself one day before her death whereby she has levelled allegations against her father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law only. The said application has been filed as Annexure- 2 to the affidavit. The statement of the victim (now deceased) has been recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. whereby she had levelled allegations of setting her afire against her husband and father-in-law Raj Kumar Sonkar, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication. 8. Learned counsel has next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.09.2024, having no criminal history to her credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 9. Per contra, learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the dying declaration of the deceased was also video- recorded. Although the original documents pertaining to the dying declaration went missing, a thorough search is on for it. The transcription of the said video of dying declaration of deceased person indicates that the applicant was also involved in the commissioning of the said crime, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that there is a video recording of the dying declaration of the deceased person whereby the applicant has also been assigned the role of being involved in setting the deceased on fire, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 11. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 12. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements 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. 13. 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:- 10.7.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad