Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21781 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10799 of 2024 Applicant :- Suraj Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma,Hari Krishna Verma,Sanjeet Kumar Patel,Sudhanshu Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Atul Verma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Satyendera Srivastava, learned A.G.A. 2. This application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 355 of 2023, under Sections 302/201 I.P.C., Police Station Gosainganj, District Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 12.08.2023 stating that the applicant is the husband of the informant’s youngest sister, who had got married to the applicant about 8 years ago and who has a son aged 6 years. Since her marriage the applicant used to beat the informant’s sister. On the date of lodging of the F.I.R. she came to know that the applicant started beating up the informant’s sister at about 9.00 a.m. with the intention of killing her. She ran outside her home to save herself, but the applicant caught hold of her near a drain outside the village and strangulated her with her sari. This information was given to the informant by the applicant’s Fufa Ram Ashok. 4. An affidavit in support of the bail-application has been filed by the applicant’s Fufa Ashok Kumar. The learned counsel for the applicant states that Ashok Kumar has been described as Ram Ashok in the F.I.R. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 6. The postmortem examination report mentions- (1) Abraided contusion on right side of face; (2) Contusion on left side of head; (3) Multiple abraided contusion on front of neck, (4) Multiple abraided contusion on right clavicular region, laterial to medial end of right clavicle, and (5) Transverse ligature mark present all around the neck, without any interruption. Cause of death has been opined as “Asphyxia due to strangulation’. 7. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of the material collected during investigation as well as a copy of the charge-sheet. 8. The investigating officer has recorded statement of the deceased’s son, who stated that the applicant used to beat his mother. In response to specific questions put by the investigating officer he stated that his father is in jail for killing his mother. He came to know that the applicant has killed his mother, as everyone in the family was talking about it. 9. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith copies of statements of the P.W.1 (informant), P.W.2 (Soni Pal, deceased’s Bhabhi), both of whom stated that information of the incident had been given by the applicant’s Fufa Ashok. The informant’s Fufa Ashok Kumar has been examined as P.W.3 and he had merely stated that he had gone to the spot after receiving information of death of the deceased and he had sent information of the incident to Poonam. 10. In his cross-examination he stated that he had attended the wedding ceremonies of the applicant and the deceased from the side of the deceased. The deceased was undergoing treatment in Mental Ailment Department of Noor Manzil, Lucknow. She was short tempered, stubborn, and violent. He further stated that upon receiving information of the incident he had reached the spot and he had informed the applicant also. The applicant had gone out of the city with his employer and upon receiving information he came back the following morning. He further stated that till the dead-body was cremated, no one had any grievance and subsequently the F.I.R. was lodged. 11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that there is no eye- witness of the incident; the person who is said to have given information to all the persons, has also not said anything implicating the applicant in commission of the offence, the applicant is languishing in jail since 14.08.2023, and that the statements of witness of fact already having been recorded, in case the applicant’s release, he will not be able to influence the witnesses as well, without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the aforesaid crime. 10. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Suraj Pal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 17.4.2025 A.Nigam Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench