Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145280 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21444 of 2024 Applicant :- Santram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Johri Counsel for Opposite Party :- Bhupendra Gangwar,G.A.,Kuldeep Kumar Dixit Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. None is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Kuldeep Johri, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 526 of 2023, under Sections 498A, 304B of IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Banda, District Shahjahanpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. 5. Learned counsel has next stated that the applicant is the husband of the deceased person. The cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante- mortem hanging. The statement of PW-1 categorically indicates during cross- examination that there was no demand of dowry made by the applicant or any other family member, as such it is a clear cut case of false implication. 6. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.07.2023, as such he has been incarcerated for more than two years and four months and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. This Court had called for a report regarding the status of trial and in compliance thereof, a report has been submitted by the Trial Court concerned dated 20.08.2025. As per the said report, only two witnesses have been examined to date. 9. In the judgement passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. K.A. Najeeb, AIR 2021 SC 712, it has been held as follows:- "We are conscious of the fact that the charges levelled against the respondent are grave and a serious threat to societal harmony. Had it been a case at the threshold, we would have outrightly turned down the respondent's prayer. However, keeping in mind the length of the period spent by him in custody and the unlikelihood of the trial being completed anytime soon, the High Court appears to have been left with no other option except to grant bail." 10. 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 statement of PW-1 and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the applicant, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Santram, 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 the 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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 :- 22.8.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad