Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48660 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7557 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt.Sanju Vaish And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present application has been filed by the applicants Smt. Sanju Vaish and Suresh Chandra @ Guddu seeking bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.0245 of 2025 under Sections 85, 80(2) BS, Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Beniganj, District Hardoi. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the daughter of the informant was married to the son of the applicants on 06.07.2022. A sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- in cash was given as dowry at the time of marriage; however, an additional demand of Rs. 4,00,000/- and a vehicle was subsequently made by the in-laws, on account of which the accused persons subjected the deceased to cruelty. It is further alleged that on 17.06.2025, the accused killed her. The deceased has left behind a two-year-old daughter. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations made in the FIR stand falsified by the postmortem report, wherein except for the ligature mark, no other antemortem injury has been found. The cause of death has been opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem injury. Thus, there appears to be no antemortem injury on the body of the deceased in the postmortem report except the ligature mark. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that general and sweeping allegations have been levelled against all the family members. The applicant was present during the inquest proceedings, wherein three members of the family of the deceased were also present, yet no allegation was made by them against the applicants or any of the co-accused persons. It is further submitted that no specific role has been assigned to the applicants. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant; however, he could not demonstrate that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her death, nor is there any specific allegation against the applicant I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicants are the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased; they are in jail since 18.06.2025; charge sheet has already been filed; the applicant no.2 was present in the inquest along with three family members of the deceased; there are no antemortem injuries in the postmortem except a ligature mark, and general nature of the allegations made in the prosecution case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicants, Smt. Sanju Vaish and Suresh Chandra @ Guddu, be released on bail in the aforesaid First Information Report, subject to their furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned, with the following conditions: (i) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicants shall not pressurize or intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) 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 or to tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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. (v) The applicants shall remain present before the trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against them under Section 229-A IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and, in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and they fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then the trial Court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench