HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19845 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Km. Khushi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.41 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2), 115(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Kaptanganj, District- Kushinagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased person. FIR is delayed and there is no explanation to the said delay caused. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. Applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. Only one witness has been examined during trial and there is no likelihood of early conclusion of trial. It is further argued that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.02.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 6. This Court had called for status of trial from the trial court concerned. As per the status report dated 29.08.2025 received from the trial court concerned, one witness has been examined. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Adarsh Kumar Shukla, Km. Khushi, Sunil Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Lakkhu Sharma .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. The Supreme Court in the judgment of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam vs. The State of Bihar, (2022) 6 SCC 599 has categorically opined 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. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that there are only general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons coupled with the fact that only one witness has been examined during trial, 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. 9. Let the applicant-Lakkhu Sharma, 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 pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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. September 1, 2025 Karan BAIL No. 19845 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad