HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31239 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. Mr. Anurudh Kumar Prajapati, learned Advocate, has put in appearance and filed his power on behalf of the first informant, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant / complainant. By means of this bail application, applicant Chayanawati, who is involved in Case Crime No. 526 of 2025, under Sections 85, 80(2) BNS and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Chakeri, district Kanpur Nagar, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. As per prosecution case, in brief, complainant, who is mother of the deceased Akanksha, got an F.I.R. lodged on 11.08.2025 against Rohit, Gulab, Chayanawati (applicant), Dharmendra, Reena, Chandani, Rekha and husbands of both sisters-in-law of the deceased stating inter alia that marriage of her daughter was solemnized on 17.11.2024 with Rohit but they used to mount pressure to give additional dowry of Rs. 10 lacs. Since she was unable to fulfill their demand, therefore, her daughter who was pregnant was done to death by the accused persons. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is mother- in-law of the deceased and she has been falsely implicated in this case. General role of demand of dowry has been attributed to all the accused persons. No specific role has been attributed to the applicant. The allegation of the prosecution that the deceased was done to death in her matrimonial home by the accused persons is false and against the evidence on record because she herself committed suicide. Referring some family photographs wherein the deceased was also find place, which have been filed as Annexure No. 5 to the paper book, it is submitted that the deceased was very much happy after her marriage. Lastly, it is submitted that case of the applicant being mother-in-law of the deceased stands on different footing to that of co-accused Rohit, who is husband of the deceased. It is also Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dinesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Chayanawati .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) submitted that the applicant is aged about 65 years and she is suffering from spinal disease. The document in this regard has been filed as Annexure No. 6 to the paper book. The applicant does not have any criminal history to her credit. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.08.2025 and in case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but they could not dispute that as per the post mortem report, cause of death of the deceased is ante mortem hanging. Since the allegation of the prosecution and defence of the accused are still open to be urged before the trial Court, therefore, further details need not be referred to herein. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. Let the applicant Chayanawati be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after her release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail. September 12, 2025 Shubham BAIL No. 31239 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad