Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23606 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46354 of 2024 Applicant :- Devendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Danish Counsel for Opposite Party :- Deepak Kumar Pandey,G.A.,Rohit Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohammad Danish, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Rohit Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Kunwar Tejandra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 221 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Rajpura, District Sambhal during pendency of the trial. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 26.06.2024 against applicant and his family members and according to the FIR marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant on 25.04.2024 and after marriage applicant and his family members tortured her for demand of four wheeler and on 25.06.2024 they have taken her from her paternal home and on 26.06.2024 he received information that his daughter has died. It is further mentioned in the FIR that due to want of dowry they committed her murder in the night of 25.06.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, applicant is husband of the deceased but on the basis of false allegation of demand of dowry and torture, he has been made accused in the present matter along with his family members. 5. He further submits, actually marriage of the deceased was solemnized on 25.04.2024 but since marriage deceased was not happy as she does not want to perform marriage with the applicant and she stayed in her matrimonial home only for two days and thereafter she went to her paternal home and on 25.06.2024 she again came at her matrimonial home and on the same day she committed suicide by hanging herself. He next submits, as deceased stayed only two days in her matrimonial home, therefore, it is hard to believe that in these two days she was so severely tortured by the applicant and his family members due to that she committed suicide by hanging herself. 6. He further submits, post mortem report suggests that deceased died due to hanging, therefore, prima facie, it appears to be a case of suicidal death. 7. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 27.06.2024 i.e. for last almost eight months. 8. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within two months of her marriage in her matrimonial home under abnormal circumstances and there is also allegation of demand of dowry but they could not dispute the fact that even from the statement of the informant recorded during investigation, it reflects, she stayed in her matrimonial home hardly for 2-3 days and post mortem report suggests that deceased died due to hanging. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 10. However, applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within two months of her marriage in her matrimonial home under abnormal circumstances and there is also allegation of demand of dowry but it reflects, deceased died due to hanging, therefore, submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that prima facie, it appears to be a case of suicidal death cannot be ruled out at this stage. 11. Further, as per learned counsel for the applicant deceased hardly stayed 2-3 days in her matrimonial home after her marriage, therefore, it is hard to believe that in these 2-3 days she was so severely tortured that she committed suicide. This submission cannot be ruled out considering the fact that informant in his statement recorded during investigation also admitted the fact that deceased after marriage stayed in her matrimonial home hardly for 2-3 days. 12. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 27.06.2024 i.e. for last almost eight months. 13. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 14. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicant - Devendra 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. 16. 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. 17. 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 :- 19.2.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad