Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:106776 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23378 of 2025 Applicant :- Lavkush Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Lavkush Kumar Shukla,Lokesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Lavkush Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Session Trial No.274 of 2025, Case Crime No.231 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80(2) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Fatehabad, District Agra with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 16.02.2022. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the deceased to cruelty for demand of Rs.3 lakhs as dowry, thereby leading her to death on 12.10.2022. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. As a bona fide act, he had informed the police authorities about the death of the deceased person. The deceased could not bear a child, as such, she was depressed and out of depression, she had committed suicide. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there was no earlier complaint of demanding any dowry whatsoever. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 27.10.2024 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. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt and the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts that the FIR was instituted promptly and the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 9. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 11. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 8.7.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad