Bail granted based on lack of specific allegations and clean antecedents of the petitioner.

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, Advocate Mrs. Alka Singh, Advocate Ms. Deepali Singh, Advocate Mr. Amrendra Kumar Advocate Mr. Anmol Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad, Advocate Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

20.06.2025 in connection with Kako P.S. Case No. 100 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 18.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other co-accused persons are alleged to have assaulted and murdered the informant’s daughter due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- as dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the ground that he being the husband of the deceased. From bare perusal of F.I.R., it appears that the F.I.R. has been instituted on 18.04.2025 but before lodging of the F.I.R., the inquest report was prepared at 3:30 P.M. and thereafter the postmortem was conducted on 17.04.2025 at 9:40 P.M. and thereafter the F.I.R. was instituted on 18.04.2025 at 8:35 A.M. and the informant has participated in last rites of the deceased and he has filed the present case only to falsely implicate the petitioner. From bare perusal of F.I.R. it appears that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. but there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act against him and a similar set of allegation, co-accused namely, Priyanka Devi, Lakshman Kumar and Pravinda Devi who happens to be father-in-law, mother-in-law and other family of the deceased member have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 23.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 40513 of 2025. He further submits that the police after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and fairly submits that trial has began and out of ten charge-sheeted witnesses, two witnesses have been examined.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioner has clean antecedent and similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Jehanabad in connection with Kako P.S. Case No. 100 of 2025, with the following conditions:

i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has