HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30125 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Akhtar Ali, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajaj Ahmad, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, 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.723 of 2024, under Sections 80(2), 85, 103(1) B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kwarsi, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the deceased person as per Muslim Rites on 08.08.2020. Subsequent to it, the applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for demand of a bullet motorcycle and Rs.2 lakhs as dowry, thereby led her to death on 24.08.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The applicant was not present at the place of occurrence, as such, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is true that the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem strangulation, but she has been strangulated by somebody else. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 27.08.2024 and is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajaj Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mairaj .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant is the husband of the deceased person and being the main accused person is not entitled for bail. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the cause of death being asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem strangulation and the deceased having expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 8. 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. 9. 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. October 8, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 30125 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad