Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79018 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6882 of 2025 Applicant :- Durvijay Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sujan Singh Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Shahi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajeet Kumar holding brief of Sri Sujan Singh, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Durvijay Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.236 of 2024, under Section 108 of B.N.S., 2023, registered at Police Station Allau, district Mainpuri. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 5.12.2024 by Rajvir Singh against the applicant alleging therein that the marriage of his sister was solemnized around 10 years back with Omveer. His sister Ram Lali was living with her husband and three children. In-front of their house a quack practicing as doctor namely Dr. Durvijay Singh was living who was having an evil eye on his sister since the last two years. On 4.12.2024 when his brother-in-law was not in the house and gone to work then on finding an option, Durvijay Singh came inside the house at about 6 a.m. and tried to commit rape upon his sister and forcibly administered poison to her. She died in the hospital during treatment. A report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that allegations against the applicant are totally false and concocted. It is argued that Shweta @ Swati and Saumya, the daughters of the deceased were interrogated during investigation who have stated of the fact that the applicant after having some fight with their mother mixed something in a glass and forcibly made her to drink it. Both the said girls have not been made as a witness in the charge sheet. It is argued that investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant under Section 108 B.N.S on which the court concerned has taken cognizance vide order dated 7.2.2025. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit and is in jail since 12.12.2024. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the FIR and there are allegations against him. Omveer, the husband of the deceased was also interrogated who has named the applicant and has levelled allegations against him. Smt. Anita, the sister of the deceased also levelled allegations against the applicant. Learned counsel for the State submitted that as per compliance affidavit dated 21.4.2025, the viscera report of the deceased was examined which was found to contain Orgenochloro insecticide poison. The applicant is the only accused in the present matter and there are allegations against him. Even the medical examination report corroborates the prosecution version. The bail application of the applicant be rejected. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is named in the FIR. There are allegations against him. Witnesses also named the applicant and levelled allegations against the applicant of administering poison to the deceased. The deceased died because of poisoning. The viscera report of the deceased found to contain Orgenochloro insecticide poison. The medical examination report corroborates the prosecution version. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad