HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6633 of 2024 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. The applicants seek enlargement on bail in FIR No.09 of 2024, under Section 498A, 302 IPC & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur. 3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that daughter of the informant was married to the brother of the applicant in the year 2013 and thereafter, she was being constantly harassed and on 31.12.2023 family members of the applicant had killed her by dousing petrol and igniting fire and subsequently, she died on 05.01.2024. Dying declaration of the deceased prior to her death is on record wherein she specifically stated that her husband, brother-in-law & mother-in-law had sprinkled some liquid and thereafter, she was done to death. Statement of the eyewitness who is the daughter of the deceased, has been recorded during trial wherein she stated that on account of a fight, petrol was sprinkled and the father had ignited the fire. It was specifically stated that the applicant has also helped in commission of the offence. Specific allegations were made against applicant no.2 of having lit the fire by matchstick. Postmortem report on record indicates cause of death as antemortem burn injuries which are 90% which is also the cause of death. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vijayendra Prakash Tripathi, Anand Kumar Srivastava, Ayodhya Prasad Mishra A.P. Mishra, Rajesh Kumar Singh, Shesh Ram Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pawan Kumar Modanwal And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned counsel for the applicants argues that co-accused who is mother-in-law has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 18.02.2025 and the trial is not proceeding expeditiously and the applicants are in custody since 11.02.2024 & 01.03.2024 respectively. It is argued that out of 27 witnesses only 2 witnesses have been examined so far. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 6. Considering the statement of the eyewitnesses which has been recorded during trial which clearly links the applicant with the offence and considering the drastic manner in which the offence has been committed by all the three brothers together, no case for bail is made out. Issue of parity cannot be considered as the mother-in-law was granted bail solely based upon her age. 7. Trial Court concerned is directed to expedite the trial. 8. Superintendent of Police, Balrampur is directed to ensure that the witnesses are produced before the trial Court without taking any unnecessary adjournment. 9. The applicant would be at liberty to revive his bail plea after substantial number of witnesses is examined. 10. Present bail application is accordingly rejected in above terms. 11. Senior Registrar of this Court is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court concerned and learned AGA is directed to communicate this order to Superintendent of Police, Balrampur for information and compliance. November 24, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 6633 of 2024 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench