High Court · 2025

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the brother of the deceased and is languishing in jail since 03.01.2025. It is submitted that the father of the present applicant had lodged an FIR against in-laws of his deceased son alleging therein he has been murdered by in-laws of the deceased and he was died with unnatural death. As per the report of Fatima Hospital,Mau, the deceased has been died on 17.05.2024 and cause of death is cardiac arrest. When the body came at his home i.e. Muzaffar Nagar, the informant i.e. father of the deceased, has been told that the deceased is still alive and then the deceased was admitted in the hospital on 18.05.2024 and thereafter when the doctor certified that son of the informant has already died then the informant has requested for post mortem of the dead body of his son as he was believed that the death of his son was unnatural. The post mortem was conducted by the doctors and found that the death happened two days prior and cause of death was due to organ failure.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submitted that there are no credible evidence on record at this stage to link the applicant with the allegations as made in the confessional statement of nominated accused Priti who is sister-in-law of the applicant. It is also informed the Court during the argument that Priti has already been exonerated by the police from the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. It is submitted that the present applicant without any reason or without any material or evidence has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the applicant is 21 years old person. It is also informed the Court during the arguments that co-accused informant i.e. Malkhan Singh has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 24.03.2025 by the co-ordinate bench of this Court. On the instructions, learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions imposed by this Court while granting the bail. He has prayed for enlarging the applicant on bail.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of State who has accepted notice in advance vehemently opposed the instant bail application but not contradicted the fact that the applicant who is 21 years old is a person of clean antecedents. The investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and the main accused i.e. Priti and Sahan Pal has already been exonerated from the offence punishable under Sections 328,506 and 120-B IPC by the police as no material was found against the proposed accused in the FIR. It is also not contradicted that the informant has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 24.03.2025. The allegation against the applicant is that the applicant is conspirator for the purpose to implicate Priti in the murder of her husband to get the job.

5. Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, who has appeared on behalf of the proposed accused has opposed the bail application.

6. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

7. The allegation on the confessional statement of co-accused Priti is that the applicant is a conspirator for the purpose to implicate the accused Priti in murder of her husband to get the government job and other benefits after death of the deceased. The facts of the case is that the deceased died on 17.05.2024 and death certificate was duly issued by the Hospital at Mau The informant has forced the doctor at Muzaffar Nagar to conduct the post-mortem as the death of deceased was unnatural. As per the post mortem report, death of the deceased has taken place two days back on 17th May, 2024 as certified by the doctor in the hospital at Mau. It is also taken on record that the informant has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 24.03.2025. The main co-accused Priti and other co-accused has already been exonerated by the police from the offence punishable under Sections 328,506 and 120-B IPC as no material was found. The applicant is 21 years old person and is languishing in jail since 03.01.2025 and has no criminal history. It is also undertaken by the applicant that the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by this Court. It is not brought in the notice of the Court that the applicant will not cooperate with the trial or he may influence the witness or tamper the evidence. There are no chance for completion of the trial in the near future. Taking into consideration all entirety of the matter as discussed above, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. The bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Pankaj Kumar who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Pratima (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) PRATIMA AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the brother of the deceased and is languishing in jail since 03.01.2025. It is submitted that the father of the present applicant had lodged an FIR against in-laws of his deceased son alleging therein he has been murdered by in-laws of the deceased and he was died with unnatural death. As per the report of Fatima Hospital,Mau, the deceased has been died on 17.05.2024 and cause of death is cardiac arrest. When the body came at his home i.e. Muzaffar Nagar, the informant i.e. father of the deceased, has been told that the deceased is still alive and then the deceased was admitted in the hospital on 18.05.2024 and thereafter when the doctor certified that son of the informant has already died then the informant has requested for post mortem of the dead body of his son as he was believed that the death of his son was unnatural. The post mortem was conducted by the doctors and found that the death happened two days prior and cause of death was due to organ failure.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently submitted that there are no credible evidence on record at this stage to link the applicant with the allegations as made in the confessional statement of nominated accused Priti who is sister-in-law of the applicant. It is also informed the Court during the argument that Priti has already been exonerated by the police from the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. It is submitted that the present applicant without any reason or without any material or evidence has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the applicant is 21 years old person. It is also informed the Court during the arguments that co-accused informant i.e. Malkhan Singh has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 24.03.2025 by the co-ordinate bench of this Court. On the instructions, learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions imposed by this Court while granting the bail. He has prayed for enlarging the applicant on bail.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of State who has accepted notice in advance vehemently opposed the instant bail application but not contradicted the fact that the applicant who is 21 years old is a person of clean antecedents. The investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed and the main accused i.e. Priti and Sahan Pal has already been exonerated from the offence punishable under Sections 328,506 and 120-B IPC by the police as no material was found against the proposed accused in the FIR. It is also not contradicted that the informant has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 24.03.2025. The allegation against the applicant is that the applicant is conspirator for the purpose to implicate Priti in the murder of her husband to get the job.

5. Sri Sunil Kumar Yadav, who has appeared on behalf of the proposed accused has opposed the bail application.

6. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

7. The allegation on the confessional statement of co-accused Priti is that the applicant is a conspirator for the purpose to implicate the accused Priti in murder of her husband to get the government job and other benefits after death of the deceased. The facts of the case is that the deceased died on 17.05.2024 and death certificate was duly issued by the Hospital at Mau The informant has forced the doctor at Muzaffar Nagar to conduct the post-mortem as the death of deceased was unnatural. As per the post mortem report, death of the deceased has taken place two days back on 17th May, 2024 as certified by the doctor in the hospital at Mau. It is also taken on record that the informant has already been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 24.03.2025. The main co-accused Priti and other co-accused has already been exonerated by the police from the offence punishable under Sections 328,506 and 120-B IPC as no material was found. The applicant is 21 years old person and is languishing in jail since 03.01.2025 and has no criminal history. It is also undertaken by the applicant that the applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by this Court. It is not brought in the notice of the Court that the applicant will not cooperate with the trial or he may influence the witness or tamper the evidence. There are no chance for completion of the trial in the near future. Taking into consideration all entirety of the matter as discussed above, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. The bail application is allowed.

8. Let the applicant- Pankaj Kumar who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 30.4.2025 Pratima (Chandra Dhari Singh,J.) PRATIMA AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad