Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42261 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6650 of 2025 Applicant :- Sitvat Jahan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sultan Hasan Ibrahim,Syed Ahmad Abbas Zaidi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shishir Srivastava Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Shri Sultan Hasan Ibrahim, learned counsel for the applicant, Dr. Surendar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Shishir Srivastava, Advocate who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the informant and the same is taken on record. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 20.06.2025 in Case Crime No. 69 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2) of BNS and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Tal Katora, District- Lucknow. 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. Even as per the FIR, no specific allegation has been levelled against the present applicant, rather general allegation has been levelled regarding demand of dowry. It has been further submitted that the present applicant had nothing to do with the family affairs of her son. Her relations with her daughter-in-law were cordial and he never demanded any dowry from her or her family members. Since, the cause of death could not be ascertained, therefore, the viscera was preserved. As per the viscera report, poisonous contents in the name of Aluminum Phosphide was found. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant had nothing to do with the family affairs of her daughter in law (since deceased), as after the marriage of her son with the deceased, she was separate for all practical purposes. The present applicant is absolutely unaware as to how and why the poisonous content was given to the deceased or she had herself taken such poisonous content. Besides, being a lady she may be given the benefit of Section 437 CrPC/480 BNSS. 4. 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, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application by submitting that the present applicant and her family members had forcefully given the poisonous contents to the deceased, resultant thereof, she scummed. Being the mother-in-law she is having equal liability with the husband. Learned counsel for the informant has also stated that when the victim (since deceased) died, she was pregnant of one months. 6. Without entering into merits of the issue, considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the FIR and the fact that the present applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased, no specific allegation has been levelled against her; as per post-mortem report, the cause of death could not be ascertained but after preserving the viscera, the same was sent for chemical examination and on the basis of chemical examination report and the statement of the Doctor, the cause of death was consumption of poison i.e., aluminium phosphide; there were no ante-mortem injuries found on the body of the victim (since deceased); 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. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant- Sitvat Jahan, 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 his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her 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 her 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 her, 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 her in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. Order Date :- 23.7.2025 Anurag Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench