Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:130860 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26995 of 2024 Applicant :- Omindra @ Shaulindra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Singh,Sukrampal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Sukrampal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satendra Narayan Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajesh Shukla, 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. 0099 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Thana Bhawan, District- Shamli, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of brother of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 17.02.2024, 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 03.04.2024 at about 05:00 PM. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the brother-in-law of the deceased person and he has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about five days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the deceased was suffering from psychosis and depression, as such, she had committed suicide. The family members of the deceased were present at the time of inquest proceedings and they had not whispered a single word against the applicant regarding demand of dowry. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.5.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that there are eight injuries sustained by the deceased person and there is no explanation of the said injuries. The cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem strangulation which indicates that several persons were involved in the said incident. 9. As per the status report dated 22.07.2025 received from the concerned trial court, P.W. 1 has been examined. 10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem strangulation and there is no explanation of the injuries sustained by the deceased person coupled with the fact that one witness has been examined, however, the said witness has not been cross-examined by the counsel of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 11. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 12. 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. 13. 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 :- 1.8.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad