Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:116534 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4771 of 2025 Applicant :- Kumari Kumkum And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narsingh Pandey,Rama Shankar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants submits that during the pendency of the instant anticipatory bail application, the applicant no.2 Smt. Meera has been arrested and therefore he may be permitted to withdraw the present application as against the applicant no.2 Smt. Meera. 2. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application as against the applicant no.2 Smt. Meera is dismissed as withdrawn. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.46 of 2025 under Sections 85, 80 of B.N.S., and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Pali, District Lalitpur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is unmarried sister-in-law (Nanad) of the deceased. The applicant never demanded dowry or did she torture the deceased. In fact, the applicant never interfered in the domestic life of the deceased and her husband. The applicant is bereaved by the death of her sister- in-law and prays for peace of the departed soul. However, for the purpose of the anticipatory bail application, it is submitted that the deceased was a temperamental lady who was prone to extreme reactions even on trivial issues. On the fateful day apparently after minor disagreement with her husband, the deceased committed suicide in a fit of rage by hanging herself. The cause of death recorded in the post mortem report is asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. Learned counsel next argued that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above- mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A.has opposed the application for anticipatory bail. 7. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 8. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 10. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Kumari Kumkum involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail till submission of police report on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned the following conditions :- (i) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) the applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) the applicant would co-operate during investigation and trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. 11. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad