Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2736 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 373 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajkali Pasi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Shukla,Shreshth Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Shukla and Sri Shreshtha Srivastava, learned counsels for the applicant and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Rajkali Pasi) is languishing in jail since 28.09.2024 in Case Crime No.0399 of 2024 under Sections 85 & 80 (2) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (henceforth referred to as the "B.N.S.") & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Salon, District -Raebareli. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. 3. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned First Information Report (in short F.I.R.) wherein general allegations have been levelled against all accused persons including the present applicant. The present applicant is mother-in-law of the victim (since deceased). No specific role has been attributed to her. The relation of the present applicant with her daughter-in- law (since deceased) was cordial and she has never demanded any dowry from her daughter-in-law or her family members. The F.I.R. has been lodged having ulterior motive and extraneous design in the mind of the complainant. The cause of death is strangulation, but as per post-mortem report, the Trachea Hyoid Bone is intact and in case of strangulation such Hyoid Bone should be fractured or ruptured, therefore, this is a case of hanging. There is no other injuries except ligature marks around the neck area which might be caused on account of hanging. The charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. He has undertaken on behalf of present applicant that she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings properly and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted. 4. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for bail of the present applicant by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, she is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid factual contention of learned counsel for the applicant. 5. Without entering into merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that no specific role has been assigned to the present applicant, only general allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons, she has never demanded any dowry from the victim (since deceased) or her family members, the cause of death is strangulation, but as per post-mortem report, the Trachea Hyoid Bone is intact and in case of strangulation such Hyoid Bone should be fractured or ruptured, there is no other injuries except ligature marks around the neck area which might be caused on account of hanging, there is no prior criminal history of the present applicant, the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that she shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings properly, I am of the opinion that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case. 6. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant (Rajkali Pasi) involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her in accordance with law, under Section 208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 16.1.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench