Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:131574 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26755 of 2025 Applicant :- Harshit Alias Seetu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Kuldeep Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Sessions Trial No. 193 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 89 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B & 323 of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Ailau, District - Mainpuri, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the sister of the informant as per Hindu Rites on 08.12.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for a demand of Rs. two lakhs as additional dowry thereby leading her to death on 10.04.2024 at about 10:00 AM. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The applicant himself has consumed poison earlier on 10.03.2024 and was discharged on 11.03.2024. The said discharge certificate has been filed as Annexure No. 6 to the affidavit. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the co-accused persons i.e. the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased person, have already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court as there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. It is also argued that the deceased was not happy with the marriage, as such, she has committed suicide. 7. Learned counsel has next contended that the cause of death of deceased has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.04.2024, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt as it was instituted within a reasonable period. The deceased has expired within a span of five months of her marriage and that too within the precincts of the house of the applicant. The applicant being her husband is the main accused person, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence and also taking into consideration the fact that the FIR has been instituted within a reasonable period and the deceased has expired within a span of five months of her marriage and that too within the precincts of the house of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 10. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 11. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements 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. 12. 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:- 5.8.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad