Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:112343 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23079 of 2025 Applicant :- Vikas Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pulak Ganguly,Ravi Bhushan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nagendra Kumar Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Pulak Ganguly, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nagendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 172 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80(2) of BNS and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Birno, District - Ghazipur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the sister of the informant as per Hindu Rites on 28.05.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for a demand of Rs. 5 lakhs as additional dowry thereby leading her to death on 12.11.2024 at about 06:30 PM. 5. There are allegations that after the demand of additional dowry of Rs. 5 lakhs, the deceased person had expressed her inability to do so as her father is a teacher and small farmer. It is further alleged in the FIR that after the retirement of her father, the applicant again pressurized her to bring money from her father as he had got retiral benefits. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about 18 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. Learned counsel has also stated that the cause of death of deceased could not be ascertained, as such, her viscera was preserved. As per the chemical analysis report, organo chloro insecticide has been found in her viscera. It is also stated that the allegations with regard to demand of dowry by the applicant is false as he himself had transferred Rs. 95,000/- to the account of the deceased person on 06.07.2024 i.e. about four months before her death. 8. Learned counsel has further stated that an amount of Rs. 4 lakhs were transferred to the account of the applicant 22 days before the marriage whereby it was asked by the father of the deceased person to buy household items including furniture etc., as such, it is not a case of dowry death. 9. Learned counsel has also stated that as per the inquest report, it is opined by the Magistrate concerned that the cause of death of deceased person appears to be made due to excessive bleeding. As per the postmortem report also, some bleeding was observed on the private part of the deceased person, as such, the allegations of administering any poison to the deceased person are false. 10. Learned counsel has next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.11.2024, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 11. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that there are particular demand of dowry mentioned in the FIR and the FIR has been instituted promptly within eight hours of the offence in the night itself, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence and also considering the fact that the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant coupled by the fact that organo chloro insecticide was found in the viscera of the deceased person, as such, the cause of death of deceased person cannot be termed to be normal and taking into consideration the fact that there is demand of dowry, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 13. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 14. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements 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. 15. 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:- 14.7.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad