Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115544 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18498 of 2025 Applicant :- Mumtaz Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Arshi Rani Qadeer,Iqbal Ahmed Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Om Prakash Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Iqbal Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Om Prakash, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Arun Kumar Misrha, learned A.G.A. and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.335 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mauranipar, District- Jhansi, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the son of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Muslim Rites on 14.5.2024, and subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of a motorcycle and Rs.50,000/- as dowry, thereby leading her to death on 20.6.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased person and he has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the dead body of the deceased was found about four kilometers outside the village suspended to a tree. The matter was reported by the village Chowkidar. Learned counsel has stated that prior to the instant incident the deceased had eloped with her paramour and the son of the applicant had filed an application on the CM Portal on 20.4.2024 and had also given application to the police authorities, but no action was taken. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no evidence of the applicant being seen at the place of occurrence by any villagers whatsoever. Learned counsel has stated that the trial is moving at a snail's pace as only two witnesses have been examined to date. The cause of death was found to be asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. The deceased had committed suicide for the reasons best known to her. 8. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.6.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the deceased had expired within a span of one month of her marriage. The applicant and other accused persons live within the precincts of one and the same house. 10. Learned counsel for the informant has further stated that although it is true that dead body was recovered from a tree outside of the village but the duration of the death of the deceased was found to be 2 to 3 days before and the autopsy of the deceased was conducted on 22.6.2024 between 03:20 p.m. to 04:20 p.m., as such, it matches with the date and time of occurrence. The trial has already started, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 11. The Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam vs The State of Bihar, reported in 2022 (6) SCC 599 has categorically stated that the Courts should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration that dead body of the deceased was found suspended to a tree outside the village and there is no evidence of applicant being seen in the vicinity of place of occurrence, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant- Mumtaz Ali, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 15. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 17.7.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad