Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13963 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47063 of 2024 Applicant :- Lokesh Tomar @ Pradeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Singh,Jitendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Shri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.279 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 504 IPC & Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dibai, District Bulandshahar, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged on 29.05.2024 against applicant and his family members and according to the FIR, marriage of the applicant was performed with the sister of the informant about four years before and after marriage, applicant and his family members started torturing her for additional demand of Rs.4,00,000/- and on 28.05.2024 they administered some poisonous substance to her and when after receiving information informant arrived at her matrimonial home then found that they have taken her to the hospital. It is further mentioned in the FIR that in the hospital sister of the informant informed him that her mother-in-law, husband (applicant), brother-in-law and sister-in- law have given her poisonous substance and during treatment, she died. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is husband of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation of demand of dowry and torture, he has been made accused in the present matter alongwith his other family members. 5. He further submits that actually applicant did job in Delhi and deceased i.e. his wife always insisted to live with him but as husband was not able to bear the expenses of family, therefore, he could not take her to Delhi and only due to this reason, she consumed poisonous substance and died. 6. He further submits that at the time of incident applicant was at his home and immediately after the incident he rushed the deceased to the hospital and admitted her in the hospital and this fact is evident from page 42 of the paper book but inspite of best medical treatment, she died. 7. He further submits that during autopsy, cause of death of the deceased could not be ascertained and her viscera was preserved but now viscera report is on record, which has been filed by learned A.G.A. though his counter affidavit and from its perusal, it reflects, deceased died due to consumption of insecticide, therefore, it cannot be said that it is not a case of suicidal death. 8. He further submits that from the FIR, it reflects, as per the informant deceased in the hospital informed him that applicant and others administered poisonous substance to her but prima-facie, the averment made by informant appears to be false and at this stage no reliance can be placed on such casual version. 9. He further submits that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 31.05.2024 i.e. for last more than seven and half months. 10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within four years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial home and there is also allegation of demand of dowry and torture. 11. He further submits that there is no evidence on record, which can suggest applicant was in job in Delhi. However, he could not dispute the fact that immediately after the incident, applicant has taken the deceased to the hospital and considering the fact that deceased died due to consumption of insecticide, the possibility of suicide cannot be ruled out at this stage. 12. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 31.05.2024 i.e. for last more than seven and half months. 13. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. 14. Applicant is husband of the deceased and his wife died within four years of her marriage under abnormal circumstances in her matrimonial home and there is also allegation of demand of dowry and torture and however, there is no evidence, which can suggest that applicant was in job in Delhi but from the viscera report of the deceased, which has been filed by learned A.G.A. though his counter affidavit, it reflects, deceased died due to consumption of insecticide, therefore, possibility of suicide, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 15. Further, record also suggests that immediately after the incident, applicant has taken the deceased to the hospital and also got her admitted in the hospital and this fact shows his bona-fide. 16. Further, however, as per the informant in the hospital, deceased herself informed him that applicant and others administered poisonous substance to her but considering the conduct of the applicant, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant in this regard, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage. 17. Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 31.05.2024 i.e. for last more than seven and half months. 18. Therefore, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 20. Let the applicant- Lokesh Tomar @ Pradeep, 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. 21. 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. 22. 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 :- 27.1.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad