HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37853 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Shailendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rajeev Tiwari, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record. 3. Despite name of Sri Rajeev Tiwari being printed in the cause list, there is no vakalatnama on the record. Office to trace it out and place it on the record and make a note about it in the order sheet. 4. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicants- Shiv Charan, Reena Devi seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 50 of 2025, under Section(s) 80(2), 85 B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Talgram, District- Kannauj. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that applicants are father-in- law and mother-in-law of the deceased respectively. It is argued that marriage between the deceased/Smt. Shivarati the daughter of the informant was solemnized with Upendra the son of the applicant on 12.6.2023. It is argued that general and omnibus allegations have been levelled against all the accused persons. It is argued that the husband of the deceased has been arrested and is in jail, para no. 17 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court. It is further argued that except ligature mark on the body of the deceased there was no other bodily injury found and cause of death of the deceased as opined by the doctor is asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. It is argued that two named accused Chetram@Ramcharan and Amarawati have been exonerated during investigation and a charge sheet dated 23.3.2025 has been submitted against the applicants and Upendra the husband of the deceased, para no. 13 and 14 of the affidavit have been placed for the same. It is further argued that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shailendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajeev Tiwari Shiv Charan And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) only being the family member of the husband of the deceased. It is submitted that the applicants have no other criminal antecedents as stated in para- 21 of the affidavit and are in jail since 3.3.2025. 6. Per contra, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail. 7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicants are father-in-law and mother-in- law of the deceased. The husband of the deceased is in jail. Except ligature mark on the body of the deceased there was no other bodily injury and cause of death of the deceased as opined by the doctor is asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 9. Let the applicants- Shiv Charan, Reena Devi, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 applicants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicants will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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. (iv) The applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicants 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 209 BNS, 2023. (v) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on BAIL No. 37853 of 2025 2 dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants are deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicants. 10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. 11. The bail application is allowed. 12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. October 30, 2025 Naresh BAIL No. 37853 of 2025 3 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad