Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:122321 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21903 of 2025 Applicant :- Nekram And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Atul Kumar Shahi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sudeep Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No. 99 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Kishani, District- Mainpuri, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that the applicants are absolutely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They have nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about nineteen days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. The applicants are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased person, respectively. 5. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. There is no criminal antecedent of applicant no.2. The criminal history of one case assigned to applicant no.1 stands explained vide supplementary affidavit dated 13.7.2025. The applicants are languishing in jail since 13.5.2025 and they are ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 7. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out. 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, taking into consideration that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons, 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- Nekram and Savitri Devi, who are involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicants 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 applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 25.7.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad