Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140960 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21801 of 2025 Applicant :- Sanjay Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Purushottam Mani Tripathi Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Shahi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Purushottam Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant, Shri Arimardan Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case. 2. The present bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed on behalf of applicant, Sanjay Gupta, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 869 of 2010, under Sections 304-B, 302, 201 IPC, Police Station- Pipraich, District- Gorakhpur. The bail application of the applicant has been rejected by Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur on 24.05.2025. 3. As per the allegation made in the FIR the daughter of first informant was married with the applicant on 14.02.2007 and at the time of marriage, the applicant along with his family members demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- as additional dowry. It is further alleged in the FIR that in April, 2009, after the Vidai ceremony, when the daughter of first informant went to the house of the applicant, the applicant along with his family members started harassing her for additional demand of dowry. It is further alleged in the FIR that the applicant lived in Calcutta along with co-accused Baby Gupta and do his business, due to which love affair was developed between them. The daughter of the first informant has seen both of them in compromising position to which she objected. However, the applicant and co-accused have assaulted the daughter of the first informant and, thereafter, the applicant also got married with co- accused Baby Gupta and they are trying to kill her and on 05.07.2010, the daughter of the first informant has been killed by the applicant and co-accused Baby Gupta. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 21.03.2025. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged incident took place on 05.07.2010 and its FIR was lodged on 10.11.2010 after more than three months without giving any explanation for delay in lodging the FIR. The FIR was lodged on the basis of suspicion and hearsay though the first informant was not the eye witness. As per the statements of neighbours of the applicant, the daughter of the first informant has disappeared. The investigating officer has also passed CD Parcha No. 4 dated 27.11.2010, in which he has mentioned about the missing report, newspaper cutting and other correspondence which was done by the applicant for searching his wife. The applicant has also lodged a missing report of his wife (daughter of the first informant) in police station Damdam, Kolkata. The investigating officer also went to Kolkata and recorded the statement of police, who was doing investigation on the missing report of the daughter of the first informant which was lodged by applicant. The investigating officer passed a C.D. parcha No. 13, in which he has recorded the statement of the applicant and other co-accused persons and also recorded his finding that no offence has been made out against the applicant and hence submitted the final report dated 26.06.2011. It is submitted that the applicant has no concern with the co-accused Baby Gupta, however, all the other co-accused father, mother and brother of the applicant have already been released on bail by the court below on 18.02.2017. It is further submitted that when the applicant came to know that the proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been initiated, then he surrendered before the court below on 21.03.2025. It is also submitted that the applicant himself is a victim as his wife has disappeared and he has taken all endeavor to search her, therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant has committed the murder of the daughter of the first informant. There is no credible evidence available against the applicant either with respect to demand of dowry or murder of the daughter of the first informant and the entire criminal prosecution is based on suspicion and hearsay. Hence, bail has been prayed for. 6. Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact. 7. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, 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. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the accused-applicant, Sanjay Gupta 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: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. iv. 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. 10. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 v.k.updh. Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad