HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22178 of 2026 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Dhirendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shreyansh Upadhyay, advocate holding brief of Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.176 of 2026, under Sections 85, 103(1) BNS, Police Station Chauri Chaura, District Gorakhpur, during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is father-in-law of the deceased and as per allegation he alongwith other accused committed her murder but entire allegations levelled against the applicant are totally false. 4. He next submits, actually on the date of incident applicant was not present in the house where deceased died i.e. her matrimonial home and even during investigation I.O. could not collect any evidence that at time time of incident applicant was inside the house. 5. He further submits, applicant after receiving information when arrived at spot then thereafter he had taken the deceased to the hospital where she was declared dead. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dhirendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sunil Kumar Gopinath .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. He further submits, applicant is 60 years old person and he is not having any criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 12.05.2026 i.e. for last more than four months. 7. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submit, however applicant is father-in-law of the deceased but deceased died in her matrimonial home and postmortem report suggests, she sustained as many as 13 injuries and therefore it reflects, she has been brutally murdered and however learned counsel for the applicant argued that at the time of incident he was not present in the house but no such averment has been made by the applicant in the instant bail application. 8. They next submit, even in the present matter applicant is in jail only for last four months. 9. They further argued, therefore considering the above facts, instant bail application may be dismissed. 10. I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. Applicant is father-in-law of the deceased and as per prosecution he alongwith other accused committed the murder of her daughter-in-law. Postmortem report suggests, deceased sustained as many as 13 injuries therefore allegations levelled against the applicant are quite serious. 12. Further, however learned counsel for the applicant submits, on the date of incident he was not present at his home but in the entire bail application no such averment has been made by the applicant and without such averment merely on the basis of oral argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant it cannot be said that applicant was not present at his house specially considering the fact that there is no evidence on record which can suggest that on the date and time of incident applicant was not present in his home. BAIL No. 22178 of 2026 2 13. Further, even in the present matter applicant is in jail only since 12.05.2026 and for last four months. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands dismissed. 16. 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 1, 2026 Shahroz BAIL No. 22178 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAHROJ ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad