Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:109086 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44067 of 2023 Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arjun Singh Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anjali Jaiswal,Dhirendra Kumar Verma,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. None is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Arjun Singh Solanki, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 135 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Kasganj, District Kasganj, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu rites on 09.03.2019. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of a plot and Rs. three lacs as dowry and thereby led her to death on 25.03.2023 at about 3 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 by more than one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. It is next stated that only four witnesses have been examined till date and there is no likelihood of early conclusion of trial in near future. The Fundamental Rights of the applicant enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand violated. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.03.2023 and he is cooperating in trial. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail on the ground that the FIR was instituted within time and the cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging and the deceased had expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant. The witnesses of fact are complete and certain formal witnesses remain to be examined. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the deceased had expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, 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 :- 9.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad