HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43749 of 2024 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sunil Vashisth, holding brief of Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 109 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 120B IPC read with Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Bhatani, District Deoria, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is the husband of the deceased person. 5. Learned counsel has next stated that the cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. The FIR was instituted on 12.04.2024 at about 10:13 p.m. The inquest proceedings were complete in the morning at 10:35 a.m. and brother of the informant Umesh Yadav was present at that stage but he did not institute the FIR. 6. learned counsel has further stated that it is admitted by the informant himself that he had reached the post mortem house and as such had instituted the FIR in the night at 10:13 p.m. The post mortem was Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kumar Mishra, Vinay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Manish Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) complete at 5:15 p.m., as such the FIR is delayed by about five hours from the post mortem report. The informant is the constable in the police, as such it is a clear cut case of false implication. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.04.2024 and he has been incarcerated for more than one year and four months and he is ready to cooperate with trial. Learned counsel has next stated that only two witnesses have been examined to date and statement of informant has been recorded as PW-3 and his cross-examination is going on. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. This Court had called for a report regarding the status of trial and in compliance thereof, a report dated 29.07.2025 has been submitted by the concerned trial court. As per the said report, two witnesses have been examined to date and the trial is moving at its reasonable pace. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Manish Yadav, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. BAIL No. 43749 of 2024 2 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 1, 2025 Sumit S BAIL No. 43749 of 2024 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad