Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42022 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2117 of 2025 Applicant :- Rushtam Ali Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Durgesh Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Durgesh Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Ankit Kumar Porwal, learned counsel, who has filed Vakaltnama on behalf of the complainant/ opposite party No.2. The same is taken on record. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Rushtam Ali) is languishing in jail since 10.09.2024 in F.I.R./Case Crime No.0439 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80 (2) & 103 (1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Nanpara, District- Bahraich. 3.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.). 4.Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the date of incident has been indicated as 23.08.2024 where the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on 31.08.2024 without explaining the delay. In the impugned F.I.R., the general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicant. So as to implicate the entire family, the present applicant who is father-in-law, has been implicated in this case. No specific role has been attributed to the present applicant. As per the post-mortem report, the cause of death is Asphyxia due to ante-mortem strangulation. There are five minor injuries on the body of deceased. He is absolutely unaware as to how the deceased received those injuries. The present applicant was living separately, as indicated in para-16 of the bail application. There might be some scuffle between the husband and wife but he is not aware of such scuffle. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever The present applicant was having cordial relation with his daughter-in-law (since deceased) and he has never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. The charge-sheet has been filed. He undertakes on behalf of the present applicant that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court, and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order. 6. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that since the role of the present applicant was found in the commission of crime, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of learned counsel for the applicant. 7.Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record; considering the fact that there is unexplained delay in lodging the impugned F.I.R. inasmuch as in the F.I.R. the date of incident has been indicated as 23.08.2024 whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 31.08.2024; the general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicant; no specific role has been attributed to the present applicant; the cause of death is Asphyxia due to ante-mortem strangulation; the present applicant was having cordial relation with his daughter-in-law (since deceased) and he has never demanded any dowry from his daughter-in-law or her family members; the present applicant was living separately and he is absolutely unaware as to how the deceased received such injuries; there is no criminal history of any kind whatsoever against the present applicant; the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicant may be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant (Rushtam Ali) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/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 313 Cr.P.C./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 him in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. 10. Before parting with, it is expected that the trial shall be concluded with expedition in terms of Section 346 B.N.S.S. Further, the learned trial court may take all coercive measures, as per law, if either of the parties do not co-operate in the trial proceedings properly. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench