Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:108119 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23727 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey,Dinesh Mishra,Saurabh Chaturvedi,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri I.K. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Dinesh Mishra, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, 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 Case Crime No.153 of 2010, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C., Police Station Bhaura Kala, District Muzaffarnagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed as there is no time of offence mentioned in it. It does not mention as to what was demanded as dowry. There are general allegations of demand of dowry. The applicant had taken his son with him and used to live at Chandigarh, as such, could not surrender in court. 5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has further stated that the offence is of the year 2010. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 09.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant has criminal history of one case of dowry, which was settled between the parties and subsequent to it, the instant offence has been committed. 7. Learned A.G.A. has further stated that the co-accused persons, namely, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased, have been convicted by the Trial Court vide order dated 03.01.2023. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts that the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased have been convicted and the applicant absconded for about fifteen years, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 9. 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. 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 :- 9.7.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad