Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:101681 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19322 of 2025 Applicant :- Arvind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shikhar Awasthi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. Heard Shri Shikhar Awasthi, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri S. K. Rai, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record. This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused- applicant, Arvind, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 497 of 2023, under Sections 304-B, 498-A IPC alternative Sections 302/34 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Jahangeerabad, District Bulandshahar, during the pendency of the Trial. The Second Bail Application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 5.2.2025 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, No. 3, Bulandshahar and the applicant is languishing in jail since 21.9.2023.. Learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number for ulterior motive by cooking up a false story of cruelty and dowry. The FIR has been lodged after a delay of 15 hours after taking legal professional guidance with the intention to exert pressure upon the family of the applicant and extract money. The FIR giving rise to the case crime No. 497 of 2023 was lodged on 21.9.2023 at 00:43 hours regarding the incident said to have occurred on 20.9.2023 between 8:00 hours to 9:00 hours resulting in the death of Annu wife of the applicant and sister of the first informant. It has been alleged in the FIR that Annu was done to death on account of bringing insufficient dowry. Learned counsel has argued that the FIR was lodged after an unexplained delay of 15 hours from the time of the death. The inquest report was got prepared on 20.9.2023 at 10:32 AM. The Panchans opined that the death had occurred due to hanging. The Magistrate present during the inquest also opined that death had occurred due to hanging, however, to determine the exact cause of death, post mortem was carried out between 5:40 PM and 6:20 PM. The post mortem report also discloses the cause of death to be asphyxia due to hanging. The statements of the doctors who conducted the post mortem examination have maintained that the cause of death to be asphyxia due to ante mortem handing. Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that charge sheet has already been filed against the applicant (husband) under Section 498-A, 304-B IPC and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act on 17.12.2023 naming 30 witnesses of prosecution. Till date only, two prosecution witnesses i.e. PW-1 Akash Kumar (informant and brother of the deceased) and PW-2 Smt. Saroj Devi mother of the deceased have been examined out of 13 prosecution witnesses. The trial of the case is not expected to be concluded in the near future. It has also been argued that the applicant was not present at the place of the incident and had left the house to attend offence at early hours of the morning of 20.9.2023 when the alleged incident is said to have occurred. Learned counsel for the applicant has also invited the attention of the Court to the statement of the informant/brother Aakash Kumar and mother of the deceased i.e. Saroj Devi recorded as PW1 and PW2, respectively, to demonstrate that the deceased was happy with the marriage but was of temporal nature and used to get annoyed on trivial issues which state of mind continued for days together. The statements recorded are also demonstrative of the conduct of the applicant and his family members which do not support the case of the prosecution. Hence, prayer bail has been made. Per contra, Shri S. K. Rai, learned AGA-I opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that deceased was died in her matrimonial home within one year of the marriage. It is responsibility of the applicant to look after her wife. Learned AGA further submits that in such type of situation, where daughter has committed the suicide, the delay in lodging the FIR by the first informant is not a ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, particularly, the evidence of PW1 (first informant) and PW2 (mother of deceased) where they said that deceased was happy with her marriage and also the fact that deceased was of aggressive nature and becomes annoyed on trivial issues, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Arvind , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. 4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. It is made clear that observation made hereinabove is only for the purpose of adjudication of bail application and it will not effect the merits of the case in any manner. Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Ravi Prakash (Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad