Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42055 Court No. - 71 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42279 of 2024 Applicant :- Jagpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhilasha Singh,Ashutosh Yadav,Shyam Lal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 313 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 201 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Rajpura, District - Sambhal, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that accused-applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. The applicant is husband of deceased and their marriage has taken place about three years prior to the incident. Learned counsel submitted that in fact at the time of alleged incident, the deceased was living at her parental home. The allegation that on 17.06.2020, the deceased was brought by applicant with him to her matrimonial home, is wholly false. Learned counsel has referred statement of P.W.-1 recorded before the trial court and submitted that there are material contradictions and infirmities. It was stated that when the informant has returned after attending the 'bhat' ceremony, the deceased was present at his home. It is further submitted that informant / P.W.-1 has admitted in his statement before the Trial Court that three days before the incident, deceased was at his home and thereafter P.W.-1 and along with his family members has gone to attend a marriage function. In his cross- examination, P.W.-1 has inter alia stated that deceased was not taken from his house in his presence. Learned counsel has referred cross-examination of P.W.-1 and of other witnesses and submitted that there is no evidence that deceased was taken away from her parental home by the applicant. The incident took place during COVID-19 Pandemic period. The dead body of deceased has not been recovered at the instance of applicant. The incident did not take place at her matrimonial home. 4. It is further submitted that while rejecting first bail application of applicant vide order dated 02.02.2024, the Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same as early as possible preferably within a period of nine months. The copy of said order was filed before the Trial Court without any delay. During trial only seven witnesses have been examined so far and 24 witnesses have been shown in the charge sheet. As material witnesses have already been examined thus, there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. The applicant is in jail since 20.06.2020 and thus, he has already undergone the detention of more than four and a half years and trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. The applicant has no criminal history and it was submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant is husband of deceased and there is evidence that she was harassed on account of dowry. It was submitted that on 17.06.2020 deceased was taken away by the applicant to her matrimonial home and thereafter on 19.06.2020 her dead body was found in the area of Village- Molanpur. The deceased has suffered death due to strangulation. 6. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 7. It appears from the record that applicant is husband of deceased and their marriage has taken place about three years prior to the incident. The case of applicant is that at the time of incident she was at her parental home and applicant has never brought her from there. On the other hand, case of prosecution is that on 17.06.2020 deceased was taken away by applicant from her parental home. The material witnesses have already been examined before the Trial Court. The applicant is in jail since 20.06.2020 and it appears that number of witnesses are yet to be examined and therefore trial of the case is likely to take sufficient long time. Applicant has no criminal antecedent. 8. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances and period of detention, a case for bail is made out. Hence, the present second bail application is hereby allowed. 9. Let the applicant - Jagpal involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. iv. The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case. 10. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 21.3.2025 SK Srivastava Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad