Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113728 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28780 of 2024 Applicant :- Javed Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Avnish Kumar Srivastava,Dheeraj Kumar Singh,Triloki Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Third and fourth supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Avnish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mansur Ahmad, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Varun Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 131 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B, 323 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Ecotech-III, District-Gautam Buddh Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant as per Muslim Rites on 21.03.2022 and subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected the victim to cruelty for demand of BMW car and Rs. 50,00,000/- for business as dowry, thereby leading her to death on 09.04.2024. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The inquest proceedings of the deceased person was completed on 09.04.2024 at 11:55 PM itself and the family members of the informant were present at the time of said proceedings. They have not whispered a single word about demand of dowry whatsoever and subsequent to it, the FIR has been instituted after legal consultation. Learned counsel has argued that the demand of Rs. 50,00,000/- does not fall within the category of dowry as it was for business purposes. Although, there is demand of a BMW car as well but the said allegations are false. The applicant himself was a marine engineer and had subsequently left his job on the insistence of the deceased person only. 7. It is further argued that there are several chats between the parties whereby the applicant and the deceased person were continuously in touch through WhatsApp chats and there is not a single word regarding demand of dowry or any torture being met with her in the said chats. There is natural dispute between the deceased person and her sister-in-law (Jethani). There is no evidence which suggest that the deceased person was subjected to cruelty by the applicant. Even the said chats indicate that the deceased was feeling a bit depressed due to her second pregnancy. 8. Learned counsel has further stated that the cause of death is Asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. As a bona fide act, the applicant had rushed the deceased person to hospital and admitted her there. The said fact stands fortified from the inquest report itself whereby the said finding has been given by the Investigating Officer. 9. Learned counsel has further stated that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.04.2024 and an application was moved by the informant with a prayer to take cognizance against the other co-accused persons who have been exonerated by the Investigating Officer and due to it, the case could not be committed and after much persuasion and withdrawal of the said application the case has been committed on 15.05.2025 only. As such, the fundamental rights of the applicant as enshrined under Article 21 of the constitution of India stands violated, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail. 10. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. There is no likelihood of conclusion of the trial in near future. The applicant is is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the fact that the family members were present at the time of inquest proceeding. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the fact that more than one year has passed since the incarceration of the applicant, there being delay in institution of FIR coupled with the fact that not a single word regarding demand of dowry or any torture being met with the victim in the WhatsApp chats between her and applicant finds mentioned and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant-Javed, 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 pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 15. 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. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Karan (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad