Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50713 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41169 of 2024 Applicant :- Prashant Alias Fateh Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhilasha Singh,Ashutosh Yadav,Jai Kishan,Shyam Lal,Vipin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Indra Kumar Singh Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Ms. Abhilasha Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Indra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant-Prashant alias Fateh Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.24 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Rajor, District Etah. 4. Learned counsel for the State states that he has received instruction in the matter in compliance of the order dated 3.3.2025. 5. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 19.3.2024 by Dheeraj Kumar against the applicant and four other persons alleging therein that the marriage of his sister Asnita Kumari was solemnized with the applicant on 19.4.2019. After one year of marriage his sister gave a birth to a child. The accused persons used to torture and harass her and there was additional demand of Rs.1 lakh regarding which there was a panchayat called for settling the same but the accused persons did not stop their demand. He then paid Rs.50,000/- cash but they were not satisfied. On 19.3.2024 the accused persons assaulted her and murdered her. The child of his sister is not known. A report be lodged and action be taken. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that as a matter of fact the date of marriage of the deceased with the applicant is 19.4.2019 but in the FIR the same has been wrongly mentioned as 19.3.2024. In so far as the child of the deceased is concerned, the same is with his maternal grand-father as would appear from the statement of the first informant himself recorded during investigation. There is no evidence that the applicant has demanded any dowry from the deceased. It is argued that there is no evidence that there was any torture with the deceased soon before her death as the postmortem report shows only a single ligature mark and cause of death is asphyxia as a result of hanging and there was no other bodily injury on the body of the deceased. The deceased committed suicide and died as she was short tempered lady. Co-accused Satyawati, the mother-in-law and Phoolan Singh have been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 13.9.2024 and 21.9.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.26387 of 2024 and 34947 of 2024, copies of the said orders are annexed as Annexure No.11 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 39 of the affidavit and is in jail since 1.4.2024. 7. Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is the husband of deceased. The deceased died within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house, the death is unnatural. There is an allegation of demand of dowry and for settlement of the same a panchayat was also called but the accused persons did not stop their demand. There is a witness regarding the panchayat being held for the same. The first informant also paid Rs.50,000/- to the applicant as part of the amount demanded. The co-accused who have been granted bail are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, as such the case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused. The bail application of the applicant be rejected. 8. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of deceased. The deceased died within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house. The death is unnatural. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused persons who have been granted bail. 9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 8.4.2025/Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad