Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:127707 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25070 of 2025 Applicant :- Mundrika Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Prasad Pandey,Surendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Kailash Prasad Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 24 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85 of BNS and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Tarya Sujan, District Kushinagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about more than one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 5. Learned counsel has further stated that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. The cause of death has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. The allegations are per se false. The applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased person and he has nothing to do with the said offence. 6. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.05.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. 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. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has also placed much reliance upon the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam vs. The State of Bihar, 2022(6) SCC 599, whereby it has been categorically stated that the Courts should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant lives separately in the house opposite to the house of husband of the informant. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR and there being general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Mundrika Prasad, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his 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 the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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 :- 31.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad