Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30438 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6326 of 2025 Applicant :- Virendra Alias Gopi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Mani Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record. 2-By means of this application, applicant-Virendra Alias Gopi, who is involved in Case Crime No. 328 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Shahganj, District Agra seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. 3-As per prosecution case in brief, complainant / informant Smt. Nikhlesh, who is mother of the deceased-Naina lodged an F.I.R. on 26.07.2023 for the offence under Sections 498-A, 304-B, 323, 504, 354 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against Praveen (husband of the deceased) and other family members, namely, Gyandeep, Rajshree, Gopi, Preeti, Suman making allegations inter-alia that the marriage of her daughter Naina was solemnized with Praveen on 04.11.2022 but after the marriage, accused persons started misbehaving and assaulting her on account of additional demand of dowry. The allegation against the accused Gyandeep, who is brother-in-law (jeth) of the deceased has also been levelled that he used to molest the deceased. F.I.R. also alleges that the deceased was having pregnancy of five months' but on 26.07.2023 at about 04:00 am, she received an information that her daughter has been done to death in the night at about 02:30 am. 4-The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is father-in-law of the deceased and had no concern with the matrimonial affair of the deceased with her husband. The marriage of the deceased-Naina with his son was a love marriage and they were living separately. No specific role has been attributed to the present applicant, therefore, the applicant who has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail since 23.11.2024 is entitled to be released on bail. 5-On the other hand, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submission of learned counsel for the applicant by contending that as per the post-mortem report of the deceased-Naina, she has received following injuries:- (i) Multiple incised wounds present on Anterior Part 8 Neck, underlying blood vessels and muscles are incised at multiple site on both the sides. (ii) There are 6 incised wounds are deep of size 8cm to 10cm and 7 superficial incised wounds size 10cm to 12cm, all wounds are transverse on middle and upper part of neck. (iii) Contusion on left side of chin size 3cm x 2cm. (iv) Contusion on back side of chest below scapular region 2cm x 1cm. Learned A.G.A. further submits that the allegation of the prosecution is fully corroborated from the material evidence on record. It is a case of brutal murder of the deceased in her matrimonial home. Lastly it is submitted that in the light of presumption under Section 113-B of Indian Evidence Act coupled with the recent judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Shabeen Ahmad vs. State of U.P., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 278, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that the deceased died her unnatural death within three years' of her marriage in her matrimonial home, hence, presumption of dowry death under Section 113-B of Indian Evidence Act shall also be drawn against the applicant. In the F.I.R., allegation of cruelty has been levelled against the applicant also. So far as the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that applicant was living separately is concerned, I find that nothing is on record to satisfy this argument and the same is a disputed question of fact, which can be appropriately dealt with by the trial court after leading evidence at the appropriate stage. Considering the fact that the victim was having pregnancy of five months' and she died her unnatural death on account of multiple incised injuries caused to her as noted above, I do not find any good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. 7-Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 8-It is made clear that the observation contained in the instant order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Saurabh Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad