Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:23155 Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14561 of 2024 Applicant :- Sonu Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Singh Yadav,Ram Bali Ram Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Kumar Upadhyay Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Ram Bali Ram, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jitendra Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the record. 3. The present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Sonu Kumar with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.220 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Zamania, District Ghaziapur, during the pendency of trial. 4. The facts of the case are that a first information report was lodged on 27.09.2023 by Lali Devi against the applicant and six other persons on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. alleging therein that her daughter Arti was married to the applicant Sonu Kumar on 23.05.2017. The accused persons demanded a motorcycle in dowry and started torturing her physically and mentally regarding which there was panchayat held many times but accused persons were adamant on their demand. On 27.03.2023 in the night, the accused persons murdered her daughter and in order to save themselves threw the dead body on the railway track. They did not even give any information to her. The G.R.P. railway police gave information at the police station of unidentified body lying therein and the body was then sent for post mortem after which they came to know about the incident and then the first information report was lodged. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the present first information report has been lodged on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It is submitted while placing paragraph 16 that the deceased Arti was going to the house of her Mausa at village Nauli but unfortunately she came before train and died. It is further submitted that Suneel Ram, the brother of deceased was a witness of inquest and further the first informant Lali Devi had also put thumb impression on the inquest but there was no complaint by the said two persons to the police at that point of time but later on an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on the basis of which the present first information report was lodged. It is further submitted that the co-accused Muniya Devi, mother-in-law and Munna Ram, father-in-law have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 51680 of 2023, copy of the same has been annexed as annexure-7 to the affidavit. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history, the said fact has been mentioned in paragraph 32 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 06.10.2023. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the applicant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was found on the railway track. The information about the same was given to the police by the Chaukidar subsequent to which the inquest was conducted. It is submitted that the applicant did not make any effort to locate his wife who was missing and even inform the police regarding his wife going missing and it was only later on that the dead body of the deceased was discovered. It is submitted that there is no reason disclosed by the applicant as to how his wife reached the railway track and died and the conduct of the applicant not informing any one about the death of his wife and also his wife going missing shows his implication. 7. After having heard the learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. The dead body of the deceased was found on the railway track which as per the post mortem examination report had multiple injuries consistent with death being crushed by train. The causing of death was opined as instantaneous death as a result of ante mortem crushed injuries. Insofar as the co-accused who have been granted bail are concerned, are the mother-in-law and father in law of the deceased and as such the case of the applicant is distinguishable with them who is the husband of deceased. The death of the deceased has occurred in her matrimonial house and there is an allegation of demand of dowry. Even various times panchayat was also conducted with regards to the dispute of demand of dowry. The death has occurred within seven years. There is no reason for false implication to the applicant, this Court does not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 18.2.2025 / Manoj Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad