HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15469 of 2026 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kunwar Tejandra Bahadur, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 64 of 2026, under Sections 85, 80(2), 351(3) BNS and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Swar, District Rampur during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation she has been made accused in the present matter along with others including husband of the deceased. He further submits, however, post mortem report suggests that deceased died due to strangulation but applicant is not responsible for her homicidal death. 4. He further submits, actually there was some dispute between husband and wife and it appears, her husband strangulated her and after her murder only being mother-in-law of the deceased applicant has also been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further submits, even about 20 days before the alleged incident husband of the applicant died and therefore she was in her Iddat period and she was confined in her room, therefore, there was no occasion for her to participate along with husband of the deceased in the murder of her daughter-in-law. 6. He further submits, even bail application of Ilma the unmarried sister-in- law of the deceased has been allowed by this Court vide order dated Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mursalin .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 20.04.2026 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12971 of 2026. 7. He further submits, even there is no specific allegation against applicant and applicant is a lady and she is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 18.02.2026. 8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits, applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and her daughter-in-law has been murdered in her matrimonial home due to strangulation within one year of her marriage and there is also allegation of torture for demand of Rs. 20 lakhs and Scorpio four wheeler. 9. Learned AGA further submits, applicant being mother-in-law was having responsibility to explain the homicidal death of her daughter-in-law in proper manner but very casually she tried to shift the burden only towards the husband of the deceased and such explanation cannot be accepted being lame excuses. 10. Learned AGA further submits, however, bail application of unmarried sister-in-law of the deceased has been allowed by this Court but case of applicant is distinguishable from her and being mother-in-law, applicant was having more responsibility on her shoulder. 11. Learned AGA further submits, therefore, considering the above facts, applicant should not be released on bail and instant bail application should be dismissed. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 13. Applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and her daughter-in-law died due to strangulation in her matrimonial home within one year of her marriage and there is also allegation of torture for demand of Rs. 20 lakhs and Scorpio four wheeler, therefore, prima facie offence of dowry death is made out against her. 14. Further, however, applicant tried to explain the homicidal death of her daughter-in-law by making an averment that as about 20 days earlier her husband died, therefore, she was in Iddat period and was confined to her room and therefore she was not having any concerned with the homicidal death of her daughter-in-law and her husband appears to be prime accused BAIL No. 15469 of 2026 2 but defence taken by the applicant does not appear to be convincing and merely on the ground that husband of the deceased appears to be prime accused being mother-in-law applicant cannot be benefited in the cases like present one where her daughter-in-law has been brutally murdered in her matrimonial home in the presence of applicant. 15. Further, however, unmarried sister-in-law of the deceased has been released on bail by this Court but applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased, therefore, her case is distinguishable from the case of sister-in-law of the deceased. 16. Further, even the Apex Court in the case of Shabeen Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. (2025) 4 SCC 172 while cancelling the bail granted by Lucknow Bench of this Court to mother-in-law and father-in-law of deceased in case of strangulation observed that if in such cases bail is granted then public faith will be eroded and according to the Apex Court in such cases father-in- law and mother-in-law should not be released on bail though Apex Court in this case did not cancel the bail granted to sister-in-law of the deceased. 17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is rejected. 19. 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. May 7, 2026 AK Pandey BAIL No. 15469 of 2026 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad