HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8796 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.262 of 2025 under Section 80(2), 85, 92 BNS and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahmoodabad, District Sitapur. In the prosecution case it is alleged that the sister of the informant was married on 07.03.2025 to Sobhit Singh Yadav and the family of the informant spent enough dowry about Rs.10,00,000/- beyond their means. It is further alleged that during the wedding ceremony, the accused persons started demanding a car as additional dowry. Somehow the marriage was completed, and thereafter the sister of the informant went to her matrimonial home. It is alleged that after marriage, the accused persons subjected the sister of the informant to cruelty and harassment on account of dowry demand. The victim was pregnant at that time. On 13.07.2025 at about 05:00 a.m., the informant received a phone call from Ambar Prasad informing him that the health condition of his sister was very serious and asking him to come to Government Hospital, Mahmoodabad. When the informant along with his family members and friends reached the hospital, they found the dead body of his sister lying there. None of the members from her matrimonial home were present in the hospital. It is alleged that due to dowry she has been done to death. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Islam Khan, Farhan Alam Osmany Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Km. Sweety Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the cause of death has been shown as shock and viscera has been preserved. The FSL report is still awaited. Except for a minor contusion of 2x1 cm on the nose, there is no other antemortem injury on the body of the deceased. It is further submitted that the allegations leveled in the prosecution case are general and sweeping in nature against all the seven family members of the applicant, without any specific allegation against the present applicant. It has also been argued that there is no likelihood of the applicant fleeing from justice or tampering with prosecution witnesses. In the event of being released on bail, the applicant undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim died within four months of her marriage while carrying a 12-week fetus in her womb. The FSL report is still awaited, and there are allegations that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty in connection with dowry demands. However, she does not dispute that the allegations are general in nature against all the seven accused persons. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the applicant is unmarried; the allegations made in the prosecution case against her are general and sweeping in nature; the investigation is still in progress; the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation; she has been in jail since 17.07.2025, she has no criminal antecedents; the cause of death has been shown as shock with no other antemortem injury except one minor contusion on the nose and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Km. Sweety Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid First Information Report, subject to her furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions: BAIL No. 8796 of 2025 2 (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize or intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (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/her 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 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 appropriate 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 under Section 229-A IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (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 BNS). September 15, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 8796 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench