Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77295 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15830 of 2025 Applicant :- Prince Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharm Singh Parmar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Dharm Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Prince Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 156 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80(2) BNS and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, registered at P.S. Majhgawan, District Hamirpur. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 10.10.2024 by Smt. Veerwati against the applicant and three others alleging therein that her daughter Videsh was married on 20.04.2024 to the applicant in which she had given Rs. 5 lakh cash, gold ornaments and gifts as dowry as per her status. After marriage her daughter went to matrimonial house she was taunted and there was a demand of motorcycle as dowry. When she came back to her house she told about it after which she again went to her matrimonial house, the accused persons used to torture her and harass for dowry. The informant along with other relatives went to her matrimonial house and a panchayat was called for with regards to demand of dowry but the accused persons did not stop. On 05.10.2024 at about 02:00 pm she received an information that the accused persons assaulted her for dowry. Again there was a demand of a motorcycle and being disturbed for the same she committed suicide by hanging herself. Report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the deceased committed suicide and died which is suggestive from the postmortem examination wherein the doctor found a single ligature mark and the cause of death was opined as asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. While placing para 17 and 18 of the affidavit it is submitted that the deceased went to her maternal house, her jewellery was kept by her mother and while coming back to her in-laws she asked for her jewellary, her mother stated that she has mortgaged all of it, which was the reason for her being disturbed and she committed suicide. It is submitted that co- accused Balram Rajpoot father-in-law and Smt. Vimla @ Sudama mother-in-law of the deceased have been granted bail vide order dated 22.01.2025, para 25 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court. It is further submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge sheet has been filed against the applicant, Balram Rajpoot and Smt. Vimla @ Sudama, para 12 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 07.11.2024. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased died within six months of marriage in her matrimonial house. The applicant is reported having a criminal history of one more case and as such the recital in para 23 of the affidavit is false and incorrect. It is submitted that the deceased died an unnatural death in her matrimonial house within seven years of marriage. The applicant is named in the FIR and there are allegations of demand of dowry, torture and harass the deceased. It is submitted that there is no reason for false implication of the applicant and as such the prayer for bail of the applicant be rejected. 7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The deceased died within six months of marriage in her matrimonial house. The death is unnatural. The allegations of demand of dowry even previously for the said demand panchayat was also called for but the accused persons did not agree to it. The reason given in para 17 and 18 of the deceased committed suicide, the same does not transpire confidence. The case of the applicant is distinguishable with that of co-accused who have been granted bail since they are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. No ground is made out. I do not find it a fit case for bail. 8. Considering the totality of the case in particular, nature of evidence available on record, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal, J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad