Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46756 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7356 of 2025 Applicant :- Tulliram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Roshan Babu Gupta,Vaibhav Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 195 of 2025, under sections 85, 80(2) of the B.N.S. and section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Beniganj, District-Hardoi. The prosecution story in brief, is that one Satish Kumar, brother of the deceased, lodged the first information report while alleging that the death of his sister has been murdered by the applicant and his family members as they were demanding dowry as she was subjected to cruelty. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant is father-in-law and he was never involved in committing any offence. He next added that no specific allegation is levelled against the applicant and all the family members including the applicant have been roped in the first information report. He submits that the post-mortem report is evident that there is no mark of injury over the body of the deceased. He has further drawn attention of this court towards the opinion of the doctor while stating that the cause of death is due to hanging and even there is no anti mortem injury. He submits that in fact no dowry was ever demanded by the applicant and even the particular allegation, which is allegedly levelled for theft of Rs. 700/-, is also baseless. He next submits that the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from the case of other co-accused persons. He next submitted that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in jail since 14-05- 2025 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Thus, submission is that the applicant may be granted bail. It is lastly submitted that co-accused Urmila has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.07.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6846 of 2025 to which applicant seeks parity. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is named in the first information report and there is allegation against him including the other family members that they had committed murder as per the reason assigned in the first information report itself. He also submits that the Investigating Officer has found the applicant involved in committing the offence and as such, the charge-sheet has been filed. Thus, submission is that the applicant is not entitled for any relief. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is father-in-law. This court has noticed the fact that there is no anti mortem injury over the body of the deceased and as per the opinion of the doctor, the death is caused due to hanging; the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from the case of other co-accused persons; the charge-sheet has been filed and as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses; the applicant is languishing in jail since 14-05-2025 coupled with the fact that applicant has undertaken that if he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides so also the two statements of the complainant under Section 180 BNSS as well as the post mortem report; second statement of complainant shows that she has lodged the F.I.R. in anger, cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging except ligature mark there appears to be no other injury on the body of the deceased thus, considering the general nature of allegations made in the prosecution case and the fact that applicant has no criminal history, bail order of co-accused Urmila (supra) coupled with the period of incarceration gone into by the applicant, applicant is in jail since 14-05-2025 and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. Let the applicant-Tulliram involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, 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:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) 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. She 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 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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.; and (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench