Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115672 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23483 of 2025 Applicant :- Dwarika Prasad Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State. 4. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.71 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mohabbatpur Painsa, District Kaushambi with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. There are vague allegations in the FIR that applicant had demanded some money and bullet motorcycle as dowry, but subsequently in the statement of witnesses it has come up that applicant had demanded Rs.1 lakh in addition to motorcycle as dowry. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that it has come up in the statement of cousin of the deceased person that there was no demand of dowry whatsoever. The deceased had committed suicide and the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Learned counsel has stated that the investigation is tainted, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained vide supplementary affidavit filed today in Court. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.5.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the deceased had expired within a span of one month and five days of the marriage and the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. It is further argued that the deceased had expired within the precincts of house of the applicant and the FIR is prompt, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that FIR is prompt and the deceased had expired within the precincts of house of the applicant and the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 10. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 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 :- 17.7.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad