HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3323 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Priyanka Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.325 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 of DP Act, P.S. Kotwali Ayodhya, District- Ayodhya. 3. In terms of the FIR, it has been alleged that the daughter of informant was married to the applicant on 08.02.2023 and sufficient dowry was given. After going to the matrimonial home, a car was demanded. It was subsequently stated that victim became pregnant and she was being harassed on account of demand of dowry. It was also alleged that the applicant had hit her on her stomach because of which, her child had to be aborted. It was further alleged that informant had taken the victim along with her, however, she was beaten up for demand of dowry, for which, an FIR bearing Case Crime No.15 of 2024 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 307, 313, 342 IPC was lodged. It was stated that subsequently, a compromise was arrived at on 23.04.2024 and the victim went back along with the applicant. It was also alleged that the victim was still being harassed in-spite of the compromise being arrived at between the parties. The applicant had taken the victim along with him to the place of his posting i.e. Ayodhya and on 12.06.2024, a call was received from the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shivendra S Singh Rathore, Bhavesh Chandel, Sachin Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Abhay Pratap Singh, Priyanka Singh Prashant Awasthi .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) victim and she narrated about being victimized to her family. However, subsequently, she was throttled to death. 4. In the light of the said, the learned counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to the post mortem report which indicates the injuries being present on the left side of the mouth, ligature mark on the neck. In the light of the said post mortem report, submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the cause of the death has been ascertained as ante mortem hanging. He further submits that the hyoid bone was found to be intact which can only result if the cause of death of ante mortem hanging. He further submits that the earlier FIR which was registered alleging that the demand of dowry was made and victim was beaten which resulted in her abortion. However, subsequently, a compromise was arrived at which is on record along with the counter affidavit. He, thus, argues that the allegation in the FIR are false and there are no evidence of throttling. 5. Learned counsel for the informant, however, argues that prior to the offence in question as is evident from the FIR No.325 of 2024, the FIR was lodged highlighting the demand of dowry and the offence being committed against the victim vide FIR No.15 of 2024. In light of the said, it is argued by her that the applicant who is a constable and he misused his position and has subjected the victim to the harassment. She also argues that apart from the ligature mark, there are other injuries on the body of the deceased. She has also submitted that the applicant has been denied the bail in Case Crime No.15 of 2024 vide order dated 29.05.2025 passed in Bail Application No.7998 of 2025. It is also argued that applicant is posted in the same police station, in which, the FIR was lodged. Post mortem report is also not trustworthy and all these issues were not seen in the trial court. 6. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 7. Considering the fact that compromise has arrived at between the parties on 07.06.2024 and on 12.06.2024, the present FIR was lodged. In the said FIR, there are allegation of demand of dowry, however, the post mortem report on record indicates the cause of death as ante mortem hanging and apart form the ligature mark, there are no substantial injuries on the body of the deceased. The allegations do not demonstrate that after the compromise, victim was subjected to mental or physical harassment in BAIL No. 3323 of 2025 2 lieu of demand of dowry coupled with the fact that the applicant is in jail since 15.06.2024 having no substantial criminal history, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Prashant Awasthi be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. October 16, 2025 V. Sinha BAIL No. 3323 of 2025 3 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench