Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:9898 Court No. - 32 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48122 of 2023 Applicant :- Dheerendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Dixit,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Disha Srivastava,Hari Krishna Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record. This is the second bail application moved on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.08.2022. The present bail application has been moved on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No.323 of 2020 (State ov U.P. Vs. Dheerendra Kumar and others), under Sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, Banda, District Banda with a prayer to enlarge him on bail. The new ground which has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.05.2020 and the trial Court has summoned the prosecution witnesses, but no one has turned up for recording their evidence, on account of which the trial has not yet been concluded. It is further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the independent witnesses, namely, Raju, Gyan Pratap, Vinod Kumar, Mukesh Tripathi, Raghubeer, Mohd. Razzaq and Pankaj Kumar in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. have never whispered a single word with regard to the demand of dowry against the present applicant. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is a teacher by profession and was living a peaceful life with his wife and from this wedlock the couple has been blessed with baby girl. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that out of 15 witnesses only three witnesses have been examined and keeping in view the period of incarceration, the applicant is made out a case for bail. The applicant is in jail since 09.05.2020. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre-trial stage, therefore, applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case, the applicant is released on bail he will misuse the bail. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Let the applicant-Dheerendra Kumar involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Abhishek Sri. Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK RANJAN SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad