Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11372 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1638 of 2025 Applicant :- Nabi Mohammad And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pallavi Vatsala Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Ms.Pallavi Vatsala, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned State Counsel. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicants, the present applicants (Nabi Mohammad and Rukiya @ Rubiya) are languishing in jail since 25.12.2024 in Case Crime No.833 of 2024, under Sections 85 & 80 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mohammadi, District-Lakhimpur Kheri. 3.Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in this case as they 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 general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicants. So as to implicate the entire family, the present applicants who are mother-in-law and father-in-law have been implicated in this case. No specific role has been attributed to the present applicants. There is no injury except the ligature mark around the neck of the deceased, which might be caused on account of hanging. The present applicants were living separately and they are absolutely unaware as to how the deceased has committed suicide. The cause of death is due to Asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. There might be some scuffle between the husband and wife but they are not aware of such scuffle. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the present applicants are having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. The present applicants was having cordial relations with their daughter-in-law (since deceased) and they have never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. The charge-sheet has been filed and they undertake that they shall co-operate in the trial proceedings properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order. Besides, the applicant No.2 being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 480 B.N.S.S. 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 applicants was found in the commission of crime, therefore, they are 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 general allegation has been levelled against all the accused persons including the present applicants; no specific role has been attributed to the present applicants; the cause of death is due to Asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging; the present applicants was having cordial relation with their daughter-in- law (since deceased); the present applicants were living separately and they are absolutely unaware as to how the deceased committed suicide; the charge-sheet has been filed and the undertaking that they 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; the fact that the applicant No.2 being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C./480 B.N.S.S, without expressing any opinion on merits of the issue, I am of the view that the present applicants may be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicants (Nabi Mohammad and Rukiya @ Rubiya) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A IPC/269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C./84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC/208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. The present applicants shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. . [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 21.2.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench