Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40848 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6493 of 2025 Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pravin Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jay Kumar Soni,Nevedita Gupta Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Sri Pravin Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Dr. Surendra Singh, learned AGA for the State and Ms. Nevedita Gupta alongwith her senior Sri Jay Kumar Soni, 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 22.05.2025 in FIR/Case Crime No.224 of 2025, under Sections 80, 85 of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Kotwali Nagar, District – Raebareli. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant, who is father-in-law of the victim (since deceased), has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR wherein general allegations of demanding dowry and cruelty have been levelled against the entire family including the present applicant. No specific role has been attributed to the present applicant. 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. Cause of death is hanging. There is no ante-mortem injury on the body of the victim except ligature mark around the neck, which might have been caused due to hanging. Further, he had nothing to do with the family affairs of his son or his daughter-in-law and he is absolutely unaware about the reason as to why his daughter-in-law had died from hanging. The applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Further, co-accused Sunita Verma (mother-in-law of the deceased), having similar role, has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 04.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5845 of 2025, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail. He has further submitted that the applicant undertakes that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court. Further, the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order. 4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have, however, opposed the bail application but they could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant as well as the ground of parity. 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 father-in-law of the deceased, no specific allegation has been levelled against him; there is no ante-mortem injury on the body of the victim except the ligature mark; the applicant is having no prior criminal history of any kind whatsoever; the fact that aforesaid co-accused having similar role has been enlarged on bail 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. 6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant- Sanjay Kumar 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 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 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 him, 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 him in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 17.7.2025 RBS/- Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench