Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11833 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45105 of 2024 Applicant :- Tajendra Singh Alias Rajveer Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Dhar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 400 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Powayan, District Shahjahanpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 15.6.2024 against the applicant and his family members and according to the FIR, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the sister of the informant about four years before and after marriage, applicant and his family members tortured her for additional demand of dowry and due to non fulfilment of additional demand of dowry on 12.6.2024 they committed her murder. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, applicant is husband of the deceased but on the basis of false allegations of demand of dowry and torture, he has been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further submitted that even from perusal of the FIR, it reflects that informant did not disclose any specific demand of dowry in it and therefore, FIR is based on vague allegations of demand of dowry. 6. He further submitted that actually deceased was short tempered lady and she used to create scenes on minor matrimonial issues and on such minor issue, dispute arose between husband and wife and thereafter in rash and anger, she consumed insecticide and died. 7. He further submitted that immediately after the incident applicant side informed the informant and thereafter they arrived and inquest was conducted on 13.6.2024 and till inquest, no objection was raised by the informant side but suddenly after two days i.e. 15.6.2024 FIR of the present case was lodged and this fact clearly suggests that actually it is not a case of dowry death and subsequently, after due consultation on the basis of false allegations, FIR of the present case was lodged. 8. 8. He further submits, the fact that some dispute arose between husband and wife on the date of incident thereafter deceased consumed some poisonous substance, is also evident from the affidavit filed by the villagers and this fact has been noted by the Investigating Officer in the case diary which has been annexed at page-54 of the paper book. 9. He further submitted that during post mortem, cause of death of deceased could not be ascertained and her viscera was preserved but now viscera report is on record which has been annexed alongwith the instant bail application and according to it, deceased died due to consumption of insecticide and therefore, viscera report of the deceased also does not rule out, the possibility of suicide committed by the deceased. 10. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 18.6.2024 i.e. for last more than seven months. 11. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within five years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial home and there is also allegation of demand of dowry but could not dispute the fact that for the first time during investigation informant in his statement stated that there was demand of Rs. Five lacs and in the FIR, he did not disclose any specific demand of dowry. 12. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that however, inquest of the present case was conducted on the application moved by brother of the deceased on 13.6.2024 but at that time, no objection was raised by the informant side and after two days, FIR of the present case was lodged. 13. He further further could not dispute that deceased died due to consumption of insecticide. 14. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 15. However, applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within five years of marriage under abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial home and there is also allegation of demand of dowry but from the perusal of the FIR it reflects that there is no specific allegation of demand of dowry in it and considering this fact, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that FIR of the present was lodged on the basis of vague allegation of demand of dowry, cannot be ruled out, at this stage. 16. Further, FIR of the present case was lodged after two days and it appears till inquest, there was no complaint of demand of dowry and torture. 17. Further, considering the viscera report of the deceased, possibility of suicide committed by the deceased cannot be ruled out, at this stage and therefore, argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant with regard to the alleged suicide committed by the wife of the applicant cannot be ruled out at this stage. 18. Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since June, 2024 i.e. for last more than seven months. 19. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 20. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 21. Let the applicant-Tajendra Singh Alias Rajveer Singh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 25. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 26. 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 :- 23.1.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad