HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26873 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anand Kumar Chaurasia, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.356 of 2024, under Sections 85, 80 B.N.S. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Khukhundu, District Deoria, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Hindu Rites on 26.04.2024 and subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of a bullet motorcycle as dowry, thereby led her to death on 16.11.2024. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about seven days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The informant was very much present at the time of inquest proceedings, which were undertaken on 16.11.2024 itself. He has not whispered a single word against the applicant at that stage and has instituted the FIR seven days after the inquest proceedings, which speaks volume of false implication. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Parvesh Singh, Praveen Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anand Kumar Chaurasia, Ashish Kumar Mishra, G.A. Suraj Alias Suryaprakash Chaurasiya .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the deceased was suffering uterine infection and has committed suicide out of depression. The cause of death could not be ascertained, as such, viscera was preserved and in the viscera report, aluminum phosphide has been found. The criminal history assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.03.2025 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 and learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the documents appended to the bail application indicate normal study. It was but normal for any lady to get any kind of infection and there was nothing abnormal in those documents. 9. Learned counsel for the informant has further stated that there is statement of five witnesses of the village of applicant only who have reiterated the prosecution allegations made in the FIR, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 10. In the case of Thulia Kali vs The State of T.N. AIR 1973 SC 501, the Supreme Court has held that the First information report in a criminal case is an extremely vital and valuable piece of evidence for the purpose of corroborating the oral evidence adduced at the trial. The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of the report to the police in respect of commission of an offence is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances in which the crime was committed, the names of the actual culprits and the part played by them as well as the names of eye witnesses present at the scene of occurrence. Delay in lodging the first information report quite often results in embellishment which is a creature of afterthought. On account of delay the report not only gets bereft of the advantage of spontaneity danger creeps in of the introduction of coloured version, exaggerated account, or concocted story as a result of deliberation and consultation. 11. 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 in institution of FIR and the fact that the informant was present at the time of inquest proceedings and did not care to institute the FIR, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the BAIL No. 26873 of 2025 2 Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 12. The bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant- Suraj Alias Suryaprakash Chaurasiya, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his 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 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. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 14. 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. (Krishan Pahal,J.) September 4, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 26873 of 2025 3 Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad