Sachin Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33285 of 2025

¶3

Sachin

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State of U.P.		....	.Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Dharmendra Kumar Kumar Maurya	Singh,	Dinesh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 64

¶6

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶7

Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri Nagendra Mishra, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 423 of 2025, under Sections 85, 105 and 115(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Pilkhuwa, District- Hapur, during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the husband of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The deceased was not subjected to cruelty by the applicant in connection with any demand of dowry. According to the postmortem report, cause of death was cardiopulmonary failure due to B/L pneumonia and its complications . There is no medical report with regard to earlier treatment undertaken by the deceased. Investigation has been completed. Charge sheet has been filed. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 30.7.2025 and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶10

Learned AGA and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶11

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that according to the postmortem report, cause of death was cardiopulmonary failure due to B/L pneumonia and its complications ; there is no medical report with regard to earlier treatment undertaken by the deceased. Further, the applicant has no criminal

¶12

BAIL No. 33285 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

antecedents and has remained confined for more than two months and after submission of charge sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant Sachin , involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶16

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶17

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶18

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶19