HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9283 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Umar Mahmood, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 0008 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor with the prayer to enlarge his on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that it is true that the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, but he has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is father-in-law of the deceased and he is living separately with his wife. The injuries are minor and applicant has not been assigned any role for causing injuries to the deceased and as such, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 08.01.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the deceased has sustained neck injury as her vertebra was found fractured. The deceased has expired within one month of her marriage within the precincts of the house of the applicant and as such, he is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Umair Mahmood Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohd Anees .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) not entitled for bail. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the promptness of FIR and the deceased having expired within the precincts of house of the applicant and that too within one month of the marriage due to ante-mortem neck injury, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 8.The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 9. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 10. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. September 9, 2025 #Vik/- BAIL No. 9283 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad