Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:100993 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20129 of 2025 Applicant :- Madhuri Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Bachan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Ram Bachan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.76 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Madhuban, District- Mau, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant, who happens to be mother-in-law of the deceased person, is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. The informant was present at the stage of inquest proceedings which were undertaken on 5.3.2025 itself but he has not whispered a single word against the applicant. The FIR has been instituted as an afterthought after legal consultation. 6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.3.2025 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. 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. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR coupled by the fact that informant was very much present at the stage of inquest proceedings but he has not whispered a single word against the applicant, 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. 10. Let the applicant- Madhuri Verma, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on her 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. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 :- 1.7.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad