Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:63944 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46882 of 2024 Applicant :- Prashant Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri R.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant- Prashant Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 87 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Jarcha, District- Gautam Budh Nagar. 4. The First Information Report of the matter was lodged on 19.4.2024 by Naurangi Singh against the applicant, Nishant, Mohit, Santosh, Mamta, Sunil alleging therein that marriage of his daughter Babli was solemnized with Prashant Kumar (the applicant) on 07.5.2021. On 12.4.2024 at about 08.30 a.m. he received an information from Prashant that he has reached his company but the daughter of the informant is quite unwell, after which again after 10 minutes he called that Babli is being taken to hospital. Nitin Kumar son of the informant and his maternal aunt Smt. Rinki Devi went to the hospital and found his daughter to be dead. There was injury mark on the neck of the deceased of rope from which it appears that she has committed suicide. She has a son of 01 year and if she commits suicide then she would have positively thought about her son whom she used to love a lot. When he reached the hospital no one from her matrimonial house was present there. The accused persons used to ask money from him which used to be given by him. Prashant was asking for a motorcycle on which the informant had shown his inability. He is a farmer and has limited source of income. His daughter cannot commit suicide. She has been murdered. Report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant although is husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The main thrust of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the deceased committed suicide. For the same learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court to G.D. entry at the Police Station on the basis of information from the hospital regarding death of the deceased in which also cause of death is mentioned as hanging, inquest of the deceased in which also it is mentioned that she died by hanging. It is submitted that the said two documents go to show that the deceased committed suicide since it was mentioned that she had hung herself and died. It is submitted that the deceased was taken to the hospital by the applicant but was found dead and then information about same was given to the police from the hospital on the basis of which inquest was conducted. It is further submitted that the deceased was found to have received a ligature mark on her body and cause of death as opined by the doctor is asphyxia consequent upon ante mortem hanging which is also suggestive of the fact that she committed suicide. It is submitted that investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge sheet has been submitted only against Prashant Kumar and Smt. Santosh whereas the other accused persons have been exonerated. It is submitted that Smt. Santosh has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.8.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31628 of 2024, copy of the said order has been annexed as annexure no. 9 to the affidavit. While placing para-7 of the affidavit it is submitted that the deceased hung herself from the roof in her bedroom, after which she was brought down and was taken to the hospital where the applicant also arrived from his company, however, she was declared dead. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para-39 of the affidavit and is in jail since 21.4.2024. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is husband of the deceased. The deceased died within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house. The death is unnatural. It is submitted that there is allegation of demand of dowry and further regular demand of money by the applicant and other accused persons were also made from the first informant. It is submitted that in so far as the argument that the case is of committing suicide is concerned, the same is totally misreading of the documents as in the hospital memo cause of death is mentioned as hanging which was considered while making inquest which was done on the information of the hospital wherein it was mentioned that mark of injury was due to hanging but the same in no way is suggestive of the fact that she committed suicide. 7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. There is an allegation of demand of dowry, torture and harassment by the applicant and other co-accused persons. The deceased died unnaturally within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house. 8. Looking to fact and circumstances of the case, nature of evidence and gravity of offence, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Naresh Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad