Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:93858 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16105 of 2025 Applicant :- Shivdutt Alias Chhotu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- B.N.Singh,Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Kumar Ojha,Vishnu Kant Ojha Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Manish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vishnu Kant Ojha, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Shivdutt Alias Chhotu, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.381 of 2024, under Sections 85, 3(5), 80(2), 92 BNS and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Rasulabad, District Kanpur Dehat. 4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 11.9.2024 by Ram Gopal against the applicant, Karan and Vimla alleging therein that the marriage of his daughter Anuradha was solemnized with the applicant on 26.4.2021. After marriage the accused persons demanded agricultural land as dowry from her and used to beat and assault her. They used to threaten her that if their demand is not met, they would murder her. On 10.9.2024 at about 5 a.m. they murdered his daughter and hung her. A report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that although the applicant is the husband of the deceased but has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the allegations as levelled against the applicant and other co-accused persons are general and omnibus in nature. While placing annexure no.7 to the affidavit in support of bail application, it is argued that perusal of the CD would go to show that the police of PVR reached the place of occurrence and found the door to be bolted from inside where the body of the deceased was found. It is further submitted that Putti Lal was interrogated who stated that police personnel were present and lock of the door was opened and then dead-body was brought outside, the same would go to show that the deceased committed suicide by closing the door. It is further submitted that even suicide is suggestive from the postmortem examination report. The deceased Anuradha was found to have received single ligature mark on her body and cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. There is no evidence whatsoever to show that the deceased was subjected to cruelty soon before her death. Learned counsel for the applicant to buttress his arguments regarding deceased not being subjected to cruelty soon before her death relied upon the judgements of the Apex Court in the case of Baljinder Kaur Vs. State of U.P. : (2015) 2 SCC 629, Charan Singh @ Charanjit Singh Vs. The State of Uttarakhand : (2023) 3 S.C.R. 511 and Karan Singh Vs. State of Haryana in Criminal Appeal No.1076 of 2014 : 2025 INSC 133. It is further submitted that the investigation in the matter has been concluded and charge sheet dated 28.10.2024 has been filed, copy of the same is annexed as annexure no.10 to the affidavit in support of bail application. While placing annexure no.9 to the affidavit in support of bail application, it is argued that constable Vikash Yadav employed in the field unit has stated that the bolt of the door was closed from inside which was got opened/broken and then place of occurrence was investigated. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 35 and is in jail since 10.10.2024. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. There is nothing on record to show that the door of the room where the dead-body of the deceased was found was broken. Inquest which is annexure no.3 to the affidavit in support of bail application goes to show that the field unit of police had reached there and pushed the door on which it got opened. There is nothing on record that the same was broken. It is submitted that the deceased died an unnatural death within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house and there is an allegation of demand of dowry against the applicant and other co-accused persons. As per postmortem report of the deceased, cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. Learned counsel for the State also adopted the arguments of learned counsel for the first informant and further submitted that even there is nothing in the site-plan to show that the door of the place of occurrence was broken. Even the spot inspection does not show anything with regards to breaking of the door. The bail application of the applicant be thus rejected. 7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is the husband of the deceased. There is an allegation of demand of dowry, torture and harassment by the applicant and other co-accused persons. The deceased died unnaturally within seven years of marriage in her matrimonial house. The documents being the inquest, site-plan and the spot inspection do not show breaking of the door where the dead-body was found. The same even otherwise it is a matter of trial. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. 9. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 30.5.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad