Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111395 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41484 of 2024 Applicant :- Dinanath Paswan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Singh Yadava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Second supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Rakesh Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 130 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Narahi, District Ballia, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.08.2019 and is cooperating in trial. 6. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail on the ground that the FIR is prompt as it was instituted within 11 hours of the incident. The cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem smothering, as such the applicant, being husband of the deceased person, is the main accused person. The trial is moving on and five witnesses have already been examined. The deceased had expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the deceased had expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant coupled by the fact that the trial is at its conclusive end, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 8. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 9. 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. 10. 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 :- 11.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad