Aman Ansari v. State of U.P

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27673 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶1List has been revised.

¶2Heard Sri Balbeer Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Saxena, learned A.A.G. assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 217 of 2024, under Sections 498-A, 304-B & in option 302 of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station - Hariparvat, District - Agra, during the pendency of trial.

¶4As per prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the daughter of the informant as per Muslim Rites on 19.11.2023. The applicant and other family members are stated to have subjected her to cruelty for a demand of dowry thereby set her afire and put her to death on 30.05.2024 at about 09:00 PM.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by more than five hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶6Learned counsel has also stated that the deceased has committed suicide as she did not want to live with the applicant, as such, it is a clear Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Balbeer Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Aman Ansari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) cut case of false implication. The applicant is languishing in jail since

01.06.2024, having no criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶7Per contra, learned AAG assisted by learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant is the sole accused and is named in the FIR. The deceased has expired within the precincts of the house of the applicant, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶8Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, severity of punishment and taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is the sole accused and the deceased has expired within the precincts of his house, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail.

¶9The bail application is, accordingly, rejected.

¶10However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.

¶11It 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 8, 2025 Siddhant BAIL No. 27673 of 2025 (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad