Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:131241 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26814 of 2025 Applicant :- Vikram And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Mohan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Surendra Mohan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned AGA for the State and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicants seek bail in Case Crime No. 109 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85 of BNS and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Siddharth Nagar, District - Siddharth Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that the applicants are the brothers-in-law of the deceased person and have been falsely implicated in the present case. They have nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The FIR has been lodged as an afterthought and after legal consultations. 5. Learned counsel has also stated that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. The cause of death of deceased has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. 6. Learned counsel has next contended that the applicants are languishing in jail since 15.06.2025, having no criminal history to their credit. In case, the applicants are released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. 7. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants and also the fact that the applicants have no criminal history. 8. The Supreme Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam Vs. The State of Bihar, reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599 has 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. 9. The well-known principle of "Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty," gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception. 10. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one's life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690. 11. Reiterating the aforesaid view, the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595, has again emphasized that the very well-settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment is not to be forgotten. It is high time that the Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception". 12. Learned AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 13. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA. 14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay in lodging the FIR and also considering the aforesaid judgements of Supreme Court coupled by the fact that the cause of death of deceased has been found to be asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging, I find it a fit case to release the applicants on bail. The bail application is allowed. 15. Let the applicants- Vikram, Kalyan @ Jhinak and Raju, who are involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on their 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 applicants will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicants will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 16. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 17. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date:- 5.8.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad