Shamim Ahmed, J.

1. Heard Sri Shishir Pradhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Vyas, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. This application has been filed seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime 27/2021, under Sections 498A, 304-B, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Zaidpur, District Barabank.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the husband of the deceased and the marriage of the applicant and deceased took place eight months prior to the date of incident and the relation of the applicant and the deceased was cordial, except some minor dispute as always happens between husband and wife.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the deceased committed suicide by hanging herself on the roof of the room. He further submits that the deceased was constantly mentally distressed, depressed before marriage as the marriage between the applicant and deceased was done against her wishes, thus she was living under stress and on the death of incident she committed suicide.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the F.I.R. was lodged by the father of the deceased and a general allegation of demand of additional dowry in the form of cash Rs. 4 lac and causing cruelty to the deceased was levelled on the applicant along with the other family members, who are father and mother of the applicant.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there is no prior complaint made by the deceased or by the complainant regarding demand of additional dowry and regarding causing cruelty against the applicant or other family members to any authority.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that after the death of the deceased, the inquest was done and at the time of inquest no injury was found on the person of the deceased and thereafter the post-mortem of the deceased was done and as per post-mortem report, the cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. He further submits that except ligature mark no other injury was found on the body of the deceased. In support of his argument that deceased committed suicide by hanging herself, the learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance upon the extract of Modi's Medical Jurisprudence, wherein definition of hanging has been described.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the definition of hanging given in Modi's Jurisprudence and the postmortem report of the deceased are identical, it appears a case of committing suicide by hanging. He further submits that as per the Modi's Jurisprudence and as per the post-mortem report of the deceased, it is a case of hanging and not the murder or strangulation.

9. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the after investigation the name of the father and mother of the applicant was dropped that also falsify the prosecution case.

10. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. It has also been pointed out that the accused is not having any criminal history, which has been explained in para 28 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application and the applicant is in jail since 25.01.2021 and has by now done a substantial period of incarceration, therefore, the bail application of the applicant may also be considered by this Court sympathetically and he should also be released on bail.

11. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the deceased is the wife of applicant has died between seven years of the marriage, though the case appears to be murder and not hanging, therefore, his bail application may be rejected.

12. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also in the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering that no any prior application was given before the alleged incident to any of the authority; as per medical report the cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging and as per the report of the doctor, except one injury mark, there is no other injury mark present on the external or internal part of the deceased and as per the Modi Jurisprudence appears to be a case of hanging and not the strangulation or murder; there appears force in the argument of leaned counsel for the applicant that a general allegation of demand of additional dowry in the form of cash Rs. 4 lac and causing cruelty to the deceased was levelled on the applicant along with the other family members, who are father and mother of the applicant and after investigating, the name of the father and mother of the applicant was dropped that also falsify the prosecution case and further considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of UP and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 [LQ/SC/2018/152] this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

13. The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

14. Let the applicant- Shaifu @ Saifulla involved in Case Crime 27/2021, under Sections 498A, 304-B, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Zaidpur, District Barabanki be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

(5) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial, in order to secure his presence, proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(6) The applicant shall remain present, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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.

(7) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

(8) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

15. It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

16. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.