Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:129282 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28960 of 2024 Applicant :- Rahman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Aslam,Sadrul Islam Jafri,Vijay Kumar,Vimal Kant Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shyam Shanker Pandey,G.A.,Himanshu Shukla,Shiksha Shukla Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Vimal Kant, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Shyam Shanker Pandey, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Varun Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.173 of 2024, under Sections 498A, 304B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Gangoh, District Saharanpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that it was the second marriage of the applicant with the deceased person. The deceased was a lady of short temper. The applicant had four children from his earlier marriage and the deceased did not want to adjust with them, as such, had committed suicide. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the cause of death is asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. The demand of four wheeler is vague as it was the second marriage of the applicant. Only one witness has been examined to date, as such, the fundamental rights of the applicant enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand violated. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 10.05.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is prompt and the deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, as such, he is not entitled for bail. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the promptness of FIR and the deceased having expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant that too within one and half years of her marriage, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 8. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 9. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously as early as possible 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. 10. 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 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad