HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13339 of 2024 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.77 of 2024, under Section 498A, 302 IPC, Section 3/4 of D.P. Act & Section 3/25 of Arms Act, P.S. Malihabad, District Lucknow. 3. In terms of the FIR, allegations were levelled that the sister of the informant aged about 28 years was married to the applicant in the year 2017 and thereafter, the applicant used to harass her for car and dowry in which the other family members were also helping him. Subsequently, on 18.03.2024 at about 7 PM, all the family members hit the sister of the informant and the applicant who is husband, caused firearm injury on her head which resulted in her death. Postmortem report on record indicates presence of firearm wound on the left upper ear and contusion on the head which is also the reason of death, although, in the postmortem report it has been stated that the cause of death could not be ascertained. 4. In the light of the said, learned counsel for the applicant stresses that even in terms of the postmortem report, cause of death could not be ascertained. He further argues that the recovery of the weapon shown at the instance and pointing out of the applicant, was not in the presence of independent witness and the ballistic report has not yet come to link the applicant with the offence in question. He further draws my attention to Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanket Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rishitosh Yadav @ Rishi Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) the statements to suggest that the allegation with regard to demand of a car was unjustified. Confessional statement of the applicant is also on record wherein he had admitted that he was in the state of intoxication and as he was pushed by the wife, in a fit of anger, he caused firearm injury which resulted in the death. 5. In total, submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the story of there being a demand of dowry is unjustified and the applicant is in custody since 19.03.2024 and has no criminal antecedents, as such, he may be enlarged on bail as only one prosecution witness has been examined so far. 6. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, although, the applicant is sought to be prosecuted under Section 498A IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, prima-facie, allegations for the offence under Section 302 IPC have been specifically levelled; postmortem report on record corroborates the allegations. Ballistic report would be relevant at the time of trial. 7. In view of the postmortem report and the fact that a brutal offence was committed at the home, even if in a fit of anger, no good ground for bail is made out. Present bail application is accordingly rejected. 8. It will be open to the applicant to revive his bail plea after the witnesses are examined. December 2, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 13339 of 2024 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench