Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15229 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2182 of 2025 Applicant :- Rohit Singh @ Shubham Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Tewari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prabhakar Nath Mishra Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Amit Tewari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Harishankar Maurya, learned AGA for the State and Sri Prabhakar Nath Mishra, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant. Said Vakalatnama is taken on record. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 12.02.2025 in Case Crime No.252 of 2024, under Section 498-A, 304-B of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Gangaghat, District – Unnao. 3. It is alleged in the prosecution case that sister of the complainant was married with Avanish Kumar Singh on 05.12.2023. Soon after the marriage, she was tortured for the additional dowry Rs. 2,00,000/- and cash. On 19.05.2024, the in-laws of the deceased refused to get her and asked the complainant to take her away and in the night at 9:50 pm, when the informant called her sister, he was informed by her in-laws that her dead body is lying down on the door of the house. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant, who is brother-in-law (Devar) of the victim (since deceased), has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. General allegations of demanding dowry and torturing the victim have been levelled against all the accused persons and no specific allegation has been levelled against the applicant. Both his brother and the victim were working in a private company. On the date of incident, the deceased suffered pain in her chest and thereafter, she was taken to hospital where during treatment she died. It is not a case where dowry was being demanded. There is no injury present on the dead body of the deceased. During the inquest, the complaint was present. As a matter of fact, the present applicant was having cordial relations with the victim (since deceased) and has not demanded any dowry from her or her family members. The applicant had nothing to do with the family affairs of his brother and his sister-in-law and he is absolutely unaware about the reason as to why his sister-in-law (Bhabhi) had died. Cause of death is poisoning and the poisonous content is Aluminum Phosphide. The present applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Further, the applicant undertakes that if he is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application but they could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 6. 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 brother-in-law (Devar) of the deceased and no specific allegation has been levelled against him; there is no ante- mortem injury on the body of the victim; the applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant- Rohit Singh alias Shubham Singh 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 of the Indian Penal Code. (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. 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 Penal Code. (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. 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. (v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 12.3.2025 RBS/- Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench