Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38293 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2065 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Kalawati Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Pandey,Virendra Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dayanand,Krishna Ram Yadav Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Virendra Patel, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Krishna Ram Yadav, learned counsel for the complainant. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 09.11.2024 in FIR/Case Crime No.0259 of 2024, under Sections 80 (2), 85 B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Chhapiya, District – Gonda. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant, who is mother-in-law of the victim (since deceased), has been falsely implicated in the case as she has not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR wherein the allegation has been levelled against two accused persons, one is Gyandev Verma (husband of the deceased) and other is present applicant. Relations of the present applicant with her daughter-in-law were cordial. As per allegation of the FIR, the present applicant with her son had beaten her daughter-in-law mercilessly, killed her and thrown her dead body on the railway track so as to create a case of MRO (man running over). Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that there are five ante-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased, however, there are no post-mortem injuries. Statement of the Loco Pilot has been enclosed as Annexure No.4 to the bail application wherein the Loco Pilot has said that this is a case of MRO. The inquest report is also supporting the aforesaid version. Learned counsel has also stated that there might be any dispute between husband and wife and he might have assaulted her but she is absolutely unaware about the fact inasmuch as she has not beaten her daughter-in-law. Charge sheet has been filed, therefore, there is no chance to influence the investigation. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant undertakes that she shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order. Besides, being lady, the applicant may be enlarged on bail giving her the benefit of Section 480 of BNSS. 4. Learned A.G.A. as well as Sri Krishna Ram Yadav, learned counsel for the complainant, has opposed the aforesaid bail application by submitting that this is a case where false story has been created by the accused persons showing that this is a case of train accident, however, both have killed the deceased and thrown her body on the railway track, therefore, this bail application may be rejected. 5. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR; the fact that the present applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased; prima facie, it appears that this is a case of train accident as there are five ante-mortem injuries on the body of the deceased, however, there is no post-mortem injury; statement of the Loco Pilot has been enclosed with the bail application wherein the Loco Pilot has stated that this is a case of MRO (man running over) and the inquest report is also supporting the aforesaid version; the applicant being lady may be given the benefit of Section 480 of BNSS and undertaking of the applicant that she shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant- Smt. Kalawati be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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:- (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 the 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 the 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 7.7.2025 RBS/- Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench