Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:61300 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13340 of 2025 Applicant :- Satyam Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Devesh Kumar,Madhava Nand Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,R. A. Ram Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Sri R. A. Ram, Advocate states that he has filed his vakalatnama in the office on behalf of the first informant yesterday i.e. on 22.04.2025 but the same is not on record. 3. Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record by the next date and make a note in the order sheet regarding the same. 4. Heard Sri Devesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R. A. Ram, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record. 5. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant-Satyam Jaiswal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.36 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh. 6. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 25.1.2025 by Smt. Chirai Devi against the applicant alleging therein that the marriage of her daughter Suneeta was solemnized with Dinesh. Her daughter was in love-affair with Satyam Jaiswal (the applicant). On 3.4.2023 Satyam Jaiswal lured and enticed away her daughter while taking jewellery and cash. Search was made but she could not be traced out. Information was given to the police station on which case was registered u/s 366/504/506 IPC. Her daughter being major, solemnized marriage with Satyam Jaiswal and started living with him. After some days Satyam Jaiswal used to torture & trouble her daughter for dowry due to which her daughter committed suicide on 25.1.2025 in the night at bout 2 a.m. FIR be lodged and action be taken. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the applicant was living in live-in-relationship with the applicant. While placing G.D. No.4 dated 25.1.2025, it was submitted that the applicant informed the police about the death of the deceased. It was further submitted that the applicant and the deceased were in love-affair and thus there was no reason for the applicant to demand any dowry. It is submitted that at the time of incident the applicant was not present in the house as he is assistant of cook and was busy in the marriage ceremony, para 15 of the affidavit in support of bail application has been placed before the Court. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 26 of the affidavit and is in jail since 25.1.2025. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that it is not disputed that the applicant was living with the deceased in live-in-relationship. The postmortem of the deceased goes to show that she was having gravid uterus and she was having a pregnancy. Suicide by the deceased at that stage is not possible. There is an allegation of demand of dowry. 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 was living with the deceased in live- in-relationship. The postmortem of the deceased goes to show that she was having gravid uterus and she was having a pregnancy. There is an allegation of demand of dowry. 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 :- 23.4.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad