Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:5654 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47351 of 2024 Applicant :- Pramod Nishad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Chandra,Surya Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Mayank Chandra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 205 of 2024, under Sections 498-A. 304-B, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Rudrapur, District- Deoria, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged against applicant and his family members on 28.04.2024 and according to FIR, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the sister of the informant in the year 2017 and after marriage, applicant and his family members tortured her for demand of motorcycle, T.V., Cooler, Fridge and Rs. 3 lakhs and thereafter, however, informant fulfilled their demand in part but they did not stop to torture his sister. It is further mentioned in the FIR, on 23.04.2024, sister of the informant attended the marriage function in her paternal home and thereafter on 24.04.2024, applicant and his family members has taken her to her matrimonial home where they have committed her murder. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however, applicant is the 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 submitted that actually deceased i.e. wife of the applicant insisted to give expensive gift in the marriage function of her paternal home but applicant refused for the same and thereafter however, she attended the marriage function on 23.04.2024 but when she returned from the function then she started making quarrel on the same issue and only due to this reason, serious altercation took place between husband and wife and thereafter in anger, she hanged herself and died. He further submitted that the fact that there was marriage function in the paternal home of the deceased is even evident from the FIR itself. 6. He further submitted that post-mortem report of the deceased also suggests that she died due to hanging. 7. He further submitted that admittedly deceased died after six years and ten months from her marriage and this fact again shows that on the basis of false allegation of demand of dowry and torture, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and actually it is not a case of dowry death. 8. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 07.06.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant is the husband of the deceased and his wife died within seven 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 deceased died after six years and ten months of her marriage and post- mortem report of the deceased suggests that she died due to hanging. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. However, applicant is the husband of the deceased and his wife died within seven years of her marriage in her matrimonial home under abnormal circumstances and there is also allegation of demand of dowry but record also suggests that deceased died after six years and ten months of her marriage and considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that actually it is not a case of dowry death, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage. 12. Further, post-mortem report of the deceased suggests that she died due to hanging, therefore, prima facie it appears to be a case of suicidal death and reason of suicide disclosed by learned counsel for the applicant during the course of argument, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage, considering the fact that admittedly, there was marriage function in the paternal home of the deceased on 23.04.2024. 13. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 07.06.2024 i.e. for last more than six months. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant- Pramod Nishad 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. 17. 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. 18. 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 :- 10.1.2025 KK Patel Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad