HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11231 of 2026 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J. 1. Heard Sri Mohit Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajrshi Gupta, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Ramkumar Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 385 of 2025, under Sections 85, 103 and 115(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), 2023, Police Station Didauli, District Amroha, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that, as per the prosecution story, the deceased was harassed by the applicant and other family members for forcing her to obtain a loan on her plot so that the brother-in-law of the deceased, namely Sonu, and the real brother of the father-in-law of the deceased may start business from that money. The deceased died due to burn injuries after one month of the incident and she was admitted to the hospital by the husband of the deceased. It is further submitted that the husband of the deceased had been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 28825 of 2026 vide order dated 17.08.2026 on the ground that there is no specific allegation against the husband of the deceased and at the time of the incident he was not present in the house. It is further submitted that Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohit Singh, Prarabadh Jain, Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, Sr. Advocate, Umesh Chandra Shukla, Veerendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anmol Kumar Dubey, G.A., Mohd Raghib Ali, Rajrshi Gupta, Yogesh Chandra Dubey Smt Santosh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased and during investigation, the statement of the deceased prior to her death was also recorded on 26.08.2025, wherein she made a general allegation against the entire family members for harassing her and throwing some inflammable substance on her and because of that her clothes had burnt. Thereafter, the dying declaration was recorded by the Magistrate on 27.08.2025, wherein the deceased made specific allegation of throwing some inflammable substance upon her by co-accused Sonu and setting her on fire by co-accused Jitendra. Therefore, the specific allegation is against the co-accused Sonu and Jitendra and the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case merely because she is the mother-in-law of the deceased, though there is no material against the applicant and the applicant, along with the husband of the deceased, immediately brought the deceased to the hospital after the incident. 4. It is lastly submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed by the police; therefore, there is no requirement for custodial interrogation. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and, being a lady, she is entitled to be released on bail in view of Section 480 BNSS. The applicant is a law-abiding citizen and she is languishing in jail since 01.10.2025. In case she is granted bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in the FIR, allegation of harassment has been made against all the accused persons, including the present applicant, and in the statement of the deceased recorded by the Investigating Officer prior to her death, she made a general allegation against all the family members, including the present applicant, of throwing some inflammable substance on her, which resulted in setting her on fire, and thereafter, even in her dying declaration before the Magistrate, the victim made an allegation of beating against all the family members, including the present applicant, but could not dispute the fact that in the dying declaration of the deceased recorded before the Magistrate, specific allegation of throwing inflammable substance has been made against the co-accused Sonu and of setting her on fire against the co-accused Jitendra. Therefore, the BAIL No. 11231 of 2026 2 applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that the applicant is the mother-in-law of the deceased, as well as the dying declaration recorded before the Magistrate, wherein specific allegation has been made against co-accused Sonu and Jitendra, and taking into account the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court by which bail was granted to the co-accused Anita, who is having a similar role as that of the present applicant, and also keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence and complicity of the accused, and also taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts, as well as considering the mandate of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038, as well as the guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P., 2024 SCC OnLine All 6765, regarding grant of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the present application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant-Smt Santosh, involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- i. 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. ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment. iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by her. BAIL No. 11231 of 2026 3 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 10. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned. 11. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on the basis of computer generated copy of this order, downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15 days. 12. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant. 13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through Jail Superintendent, Bijnor via e-mail or on e-prison portal and Trial Court via e-mode within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685 as well as Pila Pahan@Peela Pahan and others Vs. State of Jharkhand and another, in Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 169 of 2025, decided on 29.05.2026. 14. Application, if any, stands disposed of. September 8, 2026 SA BAIL No. 11231 of 2026 4 (Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad