HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40077 of 2024 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Sudhir Bharti, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Devendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Ankit, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 139 of 2023, under Section 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sehramau North, District Pilibhit. 4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 04.09.2023 by Lokendra Kumar against the applicant and 03 other persons alleging therein that the marriage of his sister Chanda Devi was solemnized with the applicant on 07.05.2017. After marriage there was demand of Rs. 2 lakhs as dowry from her and the accused persons were consoled many times but they did not stop their demand. On 03.09.2023 the accused persons murdered his sister. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the marriage of the applicant with the deceased was solemnized around 06 six years back and there was no complaint previously either by the deceased Chanda Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ankit .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Devi or by her family members regarding any such demand of dowry. It is submitted that there was absolutely no occasion for the applicant to demand any such dowry as alleged. The story of demand of dowry is false and concocted. It is submitted that although in the postmortem examination the deceased was found to have received a single ligature mark and the cause of death was opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem strangulation but the doctor found hyoid bone to be intact and as such the opinion of the doctor that she died due to strangulation is erroneous. The applicant is in jail since 16.09.2023. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased died within seven years of marriage. The applicant is named in the first information report and there are allegations of demand of dowry. The death is unnatural in the matrimonial house. It is submitted that the cause of death was opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem strangulation which cannot be due to suicide. Learned counsel for the State has placed before the Court judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Shabeen Ahmad Vs. State of U.P.: SLP (Crl.) No. 15156 of 2024 decided on 03.03.2025 to buttress his submission. 7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased died in her matrimonial house within seven years of marriage. The death is unnatural. The applicant is named in the first information report and there are allegations against him. The cause of death as opined by the doctor is asphyxia as a result of antermortem strangulation which cannot be a symptom of suicide. No ground for bail is made out. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. 9. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. October 10, 2025 AS Rathore BAIL No. 40077 of 2024 2 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad