HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33025 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. 1-Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record. 2-The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release her on bail in Case Crime No. 75 of 2025, under Sections 80(2), 85 B.N.S. and Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Harraiya, District-Basti during the pendency of trial. 3-As per the prosecution case in brief, complainant-Amarnath Mishra who is uncle of the deceased-Ruchi got a first information report lodged on 22.03.2025 against Rajesh Kumar Pandey, Brijesh Kumar Pandey, Urmila Devi (applicant) and Priya Mishra who are husband, brother-in-law, mother- in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased respectively stating inter-alia that the marriage of his niece was solemnized on 22.04.2019 with Rajesh Kumar Pandey but after the said marriage, there was a consistent demand of dowry from the side of accused persons. On 21.03.2025 at about 08:00 p.m., he received an information about the death of his niece. 4-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. The allegation of demand of dowry, as levelled in the F.I.R. is false. In fact, deceased died by committing suicide. It is next argued that before the trial court, statement of the complainant-Amarnath Mishra, Amarendra Kumar Mishra, Ruchi Shukla and Pushplata has been recorded as PW-1, PW-2, PW-3 and PW-4 respectively but they have not supported the prosecution case in their examination-in-chief, therefore, at the request of prosecution, they have been declared hostile. On the strength of statement of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Roy Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Urmila Devi .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) aforesaid prosecution witnesses recorded before the trial court, it is further submitted that now there is a bleak chance of conviction of the applicant, hence, the applicant who is languishing in jail since 24.03.2025 is entitled to be released on bail. 5-On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but could not dispute the factum of the case as argued on behalf of the applicant. 6-Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that before the trial court, four prosecution witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the prosecution case, hence, in the light of their statement, prima-facie applicant has made out a case for bail. 7-Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed. 8-Let the applicant-Urmila Devi 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 before the release of the applicant on bail. 9-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. September 24, 2025 Saurabh BAIL No. 33025 of 2025 2 (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad