Amod vs State Of U.P.

HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Shiv Babu Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 32 of 2026, under Sections 85, 80(2) BNS and 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station Banpur, District Lalitpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased and on the basis of false allegations he has been made an accused in the present matter.

4. He further submitted that actually the daughter-in-law of the deceased did not want to live with the applicant and his wife, i.e., with her mother-in-law and she always insisted to live separately from them. He further submitted that due to above reasons very often dispute arose between husband and wife and only due to this reason on 08.11.2025, she consumed some poisonous substance. He further submitted that immediately after the alleged unfortunate incident applicant informed about this fact to informant which is evident from the FIR itself.

5. He further submitted that even applicant also informed the police and on his information inquest was conducted and during inquest, informant was also present and this fact is also evident from the inquest report, which has been filed alongwith the instant bail application.

6. He further submitted that at the time of inquest, informant did not make any allegation but after three months, he moved an application on 26.02.2026 against the applicant, his son and his wife and thereafter FIR of the present case was lodged and this inordinate delay of three months in lodging the FIR itself suggests that it is not a case of dowry death.

7. He further submitted that apart from the present case, the applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 28.2.2026.

8. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that apart from the present case, the applicant is having criminal history of one other case relating to an offence under Section 304A IPC but he could not dispute the other arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

10. However, there is allegation of dowry death of the daughter of the informant against the applicant, who is father-in-law of the deceased but there is delay of three months in lodging the FIR of the present case.

11. Further, it reflects that immediately after the alleged consumption of poisonous substance by the deceased, applicant immediately informed the informant and he also informed the police and on his information, inquest was conducted and at the time of inquest, informant was also present but he did not make any allegation against either the applicant or his son or his wife and on 26.02.2026, i.e., about three months later, he lodged the FIR of the present case. Considering this fact, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that it does not appear to be a case of dowry death cannot be ruled out at this stage.

12. Further, however, it appears, apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of a case of section 304A IPC, i.e., accidental death but merely on this ground, in the view of this Court, it is not proper to withhold the instant bail application of the applicant.

13. Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 28.02.2026, i.e. for last two and a half months.

14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

16. Let the applicant-Amod, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on 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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

18. 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.

(Sameer Jain,J.)

May 6, 2026

Ankita