Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:143665 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14403 of 2024 Applicant :- Salek Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Srivastava,Ajay Nand Pandey,Gopal Dwivedi,Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui,Neeraj Kumar Chaurasiya,Rajeev Sawhney,Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Bharti Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rajeev Sawhney, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Pankaj Bharti, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Sunil 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. 257 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Jhinjhana, District- Shamli with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the son applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites about one year before her death. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the deceased to cruelty for demand of Rs.4 lakh as dowry, thereby set her ablaze on 02.07.2023. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that no time of offence is mentioned in the FIR and applicant is not named in the FIR. It is further argued that dying declaration of the deceased was recorded on the date of institution of FIR itself i.e. on 02.07.2023 and the name of the applicant had deliberately been added in the said dying declaration. Had the applicant committed the said offence, the name of applicant would have come up in the FIR itself as it was instituted by the informant after the story being narrated to him by his sister. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that even the name of the applicant is absent in the statement of informant recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 10.01.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant was named in the dying declaration and the said fact is even mentioned in the bail application of the co-accused person whose bail has been rejected by co-ordinate Bench of this Court. 8. Perusal of the record indicates that the dying declaration was recorded at 12:35 PM which was well before the institution of FIR, as such, there is every chance that the name of the applicant was missed by the informant. 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that FIR is prompt and name of applicant being mentioned in the dying declaration of the deceased which was promptly recorded, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 10. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 11. 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. 12. 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. Order Date :- 21.8.2025 Karan (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad