HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1824 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 288 of 2024, under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Baundi, District Bahraich. In the prosecution case it is alleged that informant married his daughter on 22.04.2019 with accused No.1, after giving adequate dowry. However, after the marriage, Rs. 10 Lakhs additional dowry was demanded for construction of the house. Due to wedlock, two daughters of the deceased Nandini, aged four years and Manvi, aged two years were born. It is alleged that on 2nd October, 2024 at about 10 O'clock in the morning, wife of the informant was told by the deceased that her in-laws are subjecting her to cruelty for demanding money from her parents. It is alleged that on 2/3 rd October, 2024 in the night around 2.30 accused No. 1 called the son of the informant Vikas and informed about the death of the deceased. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the complainant in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has levelled general allegations of demand of dowry. No specific allegation has been made against the applicant. Prosecution Witnesses PW-1 and PW-2 have been examined. PW- 1 during cross-examination has not supported the prosecution case. PW-2, the mother of the deceased has been declared hostile. He further submits that the in the post-mortem cause of death could not be ascertained, hence viscera was preserved. It is submitted that in the viscera report, Chlorpyrifos Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Raman Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Madhavraj Saini .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) insecticide was found in the body of the deceased. It is submitted that the applicant is a husband. The applicant having no criminal history is languishing in jail since 07.12.2024. Co-accused Smt Neelam @ Leelawati (mother-in-law) has been granted bail vide order dated 28.01.2025 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 844 of 2025. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that after examination of fact witnesses, there is no chance of tampering with the witnesses and it is case of circumstantial evidence.In case the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. He seeks parity with the bail order of co- accused. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer. Perused the record. On due consideration to the facts that PW-1 and PW-2 have been examined before the trial court, the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.12.2024, the applicant seeks parity with the co-accused Smt Neelam @ Leelawati, the applicant has no criminal history and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant- Madhavraj Saini be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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 BAIL No. 1824 of 2025 2 with law. (v) 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 of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS). (vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS). August 25, 2025 Arvind BAIL No. 1824 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench