Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112208 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41364 of 2023 Applicant :- Rizwan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Haseen Ahmad,Mohd. Ashraf,Saurabh Basu Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anil Kumar Tiwari,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Saurabh Basu, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 295 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 304B, 316 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Fatehganj West, District Bareilly, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Muslim rites in the month of March, 2022. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of Rs. two lacs and a motorcycle as dowry and thereby led her to death on 25.10.2022 at about 7 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The allegation that there is a demand of dowry, stands falsified from the fact that both the parties reside in one and the same colony, as such it was a love marriage. Even no pleasantries were exchanged between the parties. The deceased had committed suicide and it is not a case of homicide, as such the applicant is entitled for bail. 6. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.10.2022 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 State Law Officer as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail on the ground that the cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem strangulation and the deceased had expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, as such the allegations that there was no demand of dowry, are false. Although, it is admitted that it was a love marriage but it was converted into arrange marriage. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the deceased had died within the precincts of the house of the applicant and cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem strangulation and the FIR has been instituted within four hours of the offence coupled by the fact that the trial is at its conclusive end as five witnesses have been examined, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 9. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements 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. 11. 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 :- 14.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad