HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 865 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. The present bail application has been filed by the applicants apprehending their arrest in Case Crime No.216 of 2025, under Sections 85/80(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Rampur Mathura, District - Sitapur. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.07.2025 while granting interim protection to the applicant has passed the following order:- "1. Heard Sri Kaushal Kishore Tewari, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Hari Shankar Maurya, learned AGA for the State and Sri Dilip Mani alongwith Sri Devam Shukla, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf the complainant/ opposite party no.2. Said Vakalatnama is taken on record. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicants, the present applicants are apprehending their arrest in FIR/Case Crime No.216 of 2025, under Sections 85/80(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Rampur Mathura, District - Sitapur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in the case as they have not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned FIR wherein general allegations of demanding dowry and cruelty Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kaushal Kishore Tewari, Shakti Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Devam Shukla, Dilip Mani, Lalla Ji Maurya, Nirmal Verma, Ram Tirth Chandrawati And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) have been levelled against three accused persons including the present applicants, who are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the victim (since deceased). Though daughter-in-law of the present applicants has committed suicide but she did not die on account of hanging as she was rescued but her relevant organs started malfunctioning, therefore, she died on account of septicemia. As per post-mortem report, the victim received two ante-mortem injuries; one on chin and another on neck i.e. abrasion, which might be caused on account of hanging. Learned counsel has stated that as a matter of fact, the present applicants had nothing to do with the family affairs of their son Raj Kumar, accused no.1, and his wife (since deceased). Their relations with their daughter-in-law were cordial and they never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. Further submission is that the applicants have no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Further, the investigation is going on and the applicants undertake that they shall cooperate in the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty of anticipatory bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the anticipatory bail order. Therefore, liberty of the present applicants may be protected in view of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98. 4. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter. 5. List in the week commencing 15th September, 2025 within top ten cases. 6. Considering the aforesaid submissions, till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicants- Chandrawati and Chandrika shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on both of them furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:- I. that the present applicants shall appear before the Investigating Officer concerned on 28.07.2025 at 11:00 A.M. sharp to cooperate in the investigation and shall further cooperate in the investigation till filing of the police report failing which this interim protection may be withdrawn. II. that the applicants 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 NABAIL No. 865 of 2025 2 or tamper with the evidence; III. that the applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; IV. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicants; V. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witnesses. 7. When the case is next listed, names of Sri Dilip Mani and Sri Devam Shukla shall be printed in the cause list as counsel for the complainant/ opposite party no.2. " 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that allegation in the F.I.R. are baseless and applicants have been falsely implicated. The investigating officer has filed the charge sheet without collecting the cogent and tangible evidence. He submits that in compliance of the order dated 22.07.2025, applicants have filed the bail bonds and have been released on interim anticipatory bail by the learned trial court. Applicants undertake to cooperate in the trial. Applicants have not misused the liberty of interim protection granted by this Court. 5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 6. On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that the applicants have cooperated in the investigation and they shall cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 22.07.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. 7. It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. 8. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. September 15, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/- NABAIL No. 865 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench