Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:124052 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25455 of 2025 Applicant :- Jareen Tamnna Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Atharva Dixit,Haseeb Alam Ansari,Navin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Manish Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Navin Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant 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. 194 of 2023, under Sections 326, 304, 498A and 504 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Gyanpur, District- Bhadohi, during the pendency of trial. 4. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant. The first bail application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6383 of 2024. 5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has stated that as a new ground the statement of PW-2 was recorded and he admitted that it was the applicant who rushed the deceased to hospital. As such, the applicant being a lady and having been incarcerated in jail for one year and eight months is entitled for bail as the case, as per the evidence taken on record, may not go beyond Section 304 Part-II of I.P.C. The applicant has to look after her children also. 6. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has further argued that although there is a dying declaration on record, but the said dying declaration is not certified by any medical practitioner rather it has been certified by a staff nurse, as such, it cannot be taken into consideration. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.11.2023, having no criminal antecedent to her credit. She is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the dying declaration of the deceased person, whereby the applicant has been assigned the role of having poured the kerosene oil over the deceased person alongwith her husband Javed and there being no new ground for pressing the instant bail application, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 9. The present bail application is hereby found devoid of merits and is accordingly rejected. 10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously 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. 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 :- 28.7.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad