Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:108852 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23704 of 2025 Applicant :- Deepak Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 533 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80(2), 115(2) of BNS and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Nawabganj, District -Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant as per Hindu Rites on 01.05.2020. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for a demand of dowry thereby leading her to death on 07.12.2024 at about 08:00 PM. 5. 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 13 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim was depressed due to her desire for the family business to be partitioned, as she was already living separately with the applicant. This depression allegedly led her to commit suicide. The deceased has two children out of the said wedlock and the family members of the applicant are taking care of them. 7. Learned counsel has next contended that the cause of death of deceased has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.12.2024, 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. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant coupled by the fact that the FIR has been lodged within a reasonable time, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 10. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 11. 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. 12. 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:- 9.7.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad