MOHAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P.

                HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 3705 of 2026

Mohan Singh
                                                                        .....Applicant(s)
                                        Versus
State of U.P.
                                                                   .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)                                    :    Manju Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)                               :    G.A.

Court No. - 66
                           HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. Heard Ms. Manju Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajiv Dhar
Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in
Case Crime No. 309 of 2025, under Sections 80, 85, 115(2) BNS and 3/4 D.P. Act,
Police Station Mogarra, District Mathura, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory
bail, till the conclusion of trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is father in law of the
deceased and on the basis of false allegation he has been made accused in the present
matter.

4. She further submitted that actually deceased was having illicit relationship with
some other person and therefore, within six months of marriage she committed suicide
by hanging and even post mortem report suggests that deceased died due to hanging.

5. She further submitted that after investigation charge sheet has been filed against the
applicant.

6. She further submitted that during investigation arrest of the applicant was stayed by
the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.12.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail
Application No. 27223 of 2025.

7. She further submitted that as during investigation applicant was not arrested
therefore, after submission of charge sheet his custodial interrogation is not required.

8. She further submitted that there is no allegation that applicant did not co-operate
with the investigation.

9. She further argued that apart from the present case, applicant is having no previous
criminal history to his credit and he is having apprehension that if he will appear
                                                                 NABAIL No. 3705 of 2026
                                      2

before the court concerned then he will be sent to jail.

10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not
dispute the arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

11. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record of the case.

12. However, applicant is father in law of the deceased and her daughter in law died
within six months of marriage under abnormal circumstances in matrimonial home
and there is also allegation of torture for demand of dowry but it appears during
investigation pursuant to the order dated 17.12.2025 passed by Division Bench of this
Court applicant was not arrested and now after investigation charge sheet has been
filed and there is no allegation that during investigation applicant did not support the
investigation.

13. Further, even post mortem report suggest that deceased died due to hanging
therefore, possibility of suicidal death at this stage cannot be ruled out.

14. Further, applicant is having no previous criminal history to his credit and
apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be brushed aside.

15. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in
my view, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in this case, till
conclusion of trial.

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

17. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Mohan Singh, involved in the aforesaid case
crime number, shall be released on bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal
bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding
Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-

i. that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

ii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;

iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

v. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless
personal presence is exempted;

18. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have
                                                                                                  NABAIL No. 3705 of 2026
                                                                          3

                                    the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.

                                    19. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the
                                    applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent
                                    opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

                                    April 20, 2026
                                    Ankita
                                                                                                          (Sameer Jain,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
ANKITA SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad