Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16556 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 175 of 2024 Applicant :- Gayatri Opposite Party :- State Of. U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma,Ali Moid Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Ali Moid, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. 3. By means of this application, the applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.197 of 2024, under Sections 80(2)/ 85 BNS and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Karaundikala, District Sultanpur. 4. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 25.09.2024 against the applicant's son and family members, stating that the informant had got his sister married to the applicant's son. All the accused persons used to harass her for demanding dowry. All of them had beaten her in the evening of 24.09.2024 and the informant's sister gave this information to the informant telephonically at 06.00 AM on 25.09.2024. Upon coming to know about it, the accused persons killed her by strangulation. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of anticipatory bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a 55 years old lady having no criminal history, suffering from severe heart disease and she has gone angioplasty on 13.10.2023. The applicant had suffered a leg injury in 2023 and since then, she is handicapped and her movements are restricted to the extent that she is unable to conduct her day to day course without any support. Initially, the applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of an order dated 26.11.2024, after recording submission of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant and her husband are living separate from their son and they have nothing to do with the family affairs of their son. 6. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of the material collected during investigation, copy of post-moretm report, inquest report and a copy of charge sheet dated 14.12.2024 submitted against the applicant, her husband and their son for the offence under Section 85, 80(2) BNS and 3/4 D.P. Act. A perusal of the post-mortem report indicates that besides a ligature mark around the neck, deceased had suffered as many as five injuries:- (i) A contusion of size 3X3 cm present over Left Eye. (ii) Lacerated wound of size 1X0.5 cm over left side of Nose. (iii) A contusion of size 2X1 cm on left arm. (iv) A contusion of 1X1 cm over medial aspect of right elbow joint. (v) A contusion of size 2X1 cm over Lateral aspect of right elbow joint. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that all the injuries are post-mortem injuries occasion while the dead body was being taken down. However, the doctor has opined all the injuries to be ante-mortem injuries. When there is a conflict between submission of learned counsel for the applicant and the finding of the expert doctor who conducted post-mortem examination report, the Court has to give precedence to the post-mortem examination report. Therefore, I am unable to accept the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that the five injuries besides a ligature mark found on the dead body were post-mortem injures. 8. So far as the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is living separate from her son, the applicant has filed her own affidavit in support of her anticipatory bail application, wherein she has stated on oath that her address is Gram - Karaundikala, Police Station- Karaundikala, District- Sultanpur. This is the address of the applicant's son also. The applicant has annexed a copy of her Aadhaar card, which mentions her address as Gram - Karaundikala, District – Sultanpur. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon a copy of the Parivar Register, which mentions the applicant as a resident of Village Samoodpur, Development Block - Suiya Kalan, Tehsil - Shahganj, District - Jaunpur. When the applicant herself has disclosed her address as Village - Karaundikala, District - Sultanpur and has annexed a copy of Aadhar card mentioning the same address, this Court has no reason to believe that the applicant has disclosed incorrect address under the particulars given on the affidavit on oath. Therefore, the Court is unable to accept the submission of learned counsel for the applicant regarding separate living of the applicant. 10. Keeping in view the ante mortem injuries suffered by the victim, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application stands rejected. 11. However, in case the applicant surrenders and applies for regular bail, the same shall be considered in accordance with law without being influenced by by rejection of anticipatory bail application of the applicant. [Subhash Vidyarthi,J.] Order Date :- 21.3.2025 Gurpreet Singh Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench