HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30770 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Adesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Parvej Alam, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.12/25, under Sections 85, 115(2), 351(2), 351(3), 80(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Falawada, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 09.06.2022 and subsequent to it, there was a discord between the families and a petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act was filed, but subsequently the matter was settled between the parties on 15.01.2025 and the applicant alongwith his wife started living in his paternal village alongwith his uncle. 5. Thereupon, the applicant is stated to have subjected the deceased to cruelty for demand of Rs.10 lakhs as dowry and led her to death on 23.01.2025. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 6. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Adesh Kumar, Barkha Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sachin Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) present case. The FIR is delayed by about four days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. Much vehemence has been placed on the inquest report, which was prepared on the death i.e. 23.01.2025 at about 5:50 p.m. and the informant is panch witness no.1 in the said inquest proceedings, but he did not care to institute the FIR, rather the FIR was instituted four days after the post- mortem and cremation of the deceased as an afterthought and legal consultation. 8. The cause of death could not be ascertained, as such, viscera was preserved. 9. The deceased has consumed some poisonous material. The applicant had rushed her to hospital and on being asked to take her for ventilatory support, had taken her from Falawada to Muzaffar Nagar, whereby she expired. 10. The deceased has sustained two injuries. One is linear abrasion 1.5 cm on neck over front of mid of neck and a contusion of size 3 cm x 0.5 cm over front of middle of chest. 11. The said injuries are minor and may be sustained during the said transportation of the deceased to and from the hospital and the house. 12. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.01.2025 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/INFORMANT: 13. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the delay stands explained from the fact that the FIR itself indicates that the informant had given the information at the police station on the date of incident itself about the said murder being committed by the applicant and other family members. The said fact stands mentioned in the FIR itself. CONCLUSION: 14. This Court has perused the inquest report. The inquest report indicates that the information of death of the deceased person was entered in G.D. BAIL No. 30770 of 2025 2 No.55 at 4:08 p.m. on 23.01.2025 itself and it mentioned that the deceased had committed suicide by consuming some poisonous material. The word 'murder' does not find mention in the said inquest report. 15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay of four days in institution of FIR and the fact that two injuries sustained by the deceased are minor skirmishes on the body of the deceased person, 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. 16. Let the applicant- Sachin Kumar involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with 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. 17. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 18. 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. September 9, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 30770 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad