Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113593 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24266 of 2025 Applicant :- Sulochana Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar,Yogesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Prakash Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Pandey, 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. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.08 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Jhunsi, District- Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the son of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 9.12.2023, and subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of dowry, thereby leading her to death on 8.1.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about ten hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. The two of the accused persons have been exonerated by the police during investigation whose case was also of similar nature to the applicant, as such, she is also entitled for bail. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no specific demand of dowry. It is plainly mentioned in the FIR that the applicant and other family members used to demand extra dowry. Subsequently, the informant in his statement recorded U/s 161 Cr.P.C. has plainly stated that applicant and other family members had demanded money from the deceased person as he had sold a plot of land a few months back. Learned counsel has stated that the said allegations are per se false. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the deceased had committed suicide as she was a social media influencer and wanted her husband to take her to a better place than she was living with him. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.5.2025 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the deceased had expired within the precincts of house of the applicant that too within a period of thirteen months of her marriage. The applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased person and there is demand of money as stated by the informant in his statement recorded U/s 161 Cr.P.C. 9. Learned counsel for the informant has further argued that there is nothing on record to suggest that the deceased was a social media influencer as there is no video or reels available whatsoever, as such, the said averment is false. The applicant and the deceased used to live in one and the same house, as such, she is not entitled for bail. 10. Learned A.G.A. has also opposed the bail application. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration that no specific role has been assigned to any accused person coupled by the fact that there is no mentioning as to what was demanded as dowry in the FIR and the FIR being delayed by about ten hours, 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. 12. Let the applicant- Sulochana, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on her 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 applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 14. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad