HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8495 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. It is alleged that about 9-10 months ago, the sister of the informant was married to Neeru, brother of the applicant, in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals. Adequate dowry was given at the time of marriage; however, the brother-in-law and the five named accused persons continued to demand additional dowry in the form of a gold chain and a buffalo, which the complainant could not provide. Consequently, the victim was subjected to both physical and mental cruelty. On 22.03.2025 at around 6:00 a.m., due to the non-fulfillment of the dowry demand, she was allegedly beaten and murdered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the complainant, in his statement under Section 180 BNSS, has made only general allegations without attributing any specific role to the applicant. The applicant is the sister-in-law of the deceased. It is further submitted that during the inquest, the husband of the deceased was present, and as per the postmortem report, the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. No other ante-mortem injury was found on the body, which falsifies the prosecution's claim that the deceased was mercilessly beaten immediately before her death. 4. It is further submitted that the co-accused Sangeeta Devi and Rajednra Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dhananjai Kumar Tripathi, Tanupriya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Km. Seema .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Kashyap have already been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 29.8.2025 and 04.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 8162 of 2025 and 8351 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 30.06.2025. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the bail application, submitting that independent witnesses have supported the prosecution case. 6. Having considered that the applicant is the sister-in-law of the deceased, the prosecution allegations are sweeping and general in nature against all accused persons, the co-accused Sangeeta Devi and Rajendra Kashyap have already been granted bail and the postmortem report does not disclose any ante-mortem injury other than the ligature mark, coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 30.06.2025, I am of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant- Km. Seema, involved in Case Crime No. 282/2025, Under Section-85, 80(2) BNS and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Dhaurahara, District- Lakhimpur Kheri, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant 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 tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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 BAIL No. 8495 of 2025 2 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 applicant 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 in accordance with law. (vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 9. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. September 8, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 8495 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench