KRISHNA KUMAR, J. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. 2. This is second bail application. The first bail application was rejected on 3-3-2000. 3. The applicant is husband of deceased-Smt. Asha who died in suspicious circumstances within seven years of marriage. Allegedly, there was dowry demand and torture etc. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant contended that it was applicant who got hi: wife admitted in the hospital and it show; bona fide on his part. 5. It was further contended that since the rejection of first bail application about one year has passed. It is also contended that it was accidental injuries due to which Smt. Asha died. 6. Learned Counsel for the applicant had filed bed head ticket to show that at the time of admission, the deceased told to the Doctor that she received burn injuries be cause of fall of kerosene oil lamp in he room. It was also mentioned that after the she became unconscious. The said version mentioned before the Doctor being very relevant for the purpose of this case, several opportunity were given to thee learned A. G. A. as well as the Counsel for the complainant who appeared on behalf of the complainant to oppose the bail ap plication, for filing any contradictory fac tor. However, both of them failed to file any evidence contradictory against this fact, and the result is that at this stage, the facts mentioned by the Doctor are prima facie to be taken into consideration and believable version of the deceased. 7. Learned Counsel for the applicant also contended that the B. H. T. shows that it was applicant Jogendra who brought his wife to the hospital for treatment. The Injuries were also noted into accidental register. Prima facie it is made out that as per the Doctor mentioned it were acciden tal burn injuries. Learned Counsel for the applicant argued that there are papers (annexure Nos. 4 and 5) to show that marriage had been performed in the year 1992 i. e. more than seven years had passed. It is further contended that the applicant is in jail for the last about 11/2 years. 8. Considering all the facts mentioned above and the detention of the applicant in Jail, the second bail application is allowed. 9. 4 and 5) to show that marriage had been performed in the year 1992 i. e. more than seven years had passed. It is further contended that the applicant is in jail for the last about 11/2 years. 8. Considering all the facts mentioned above and the detention of the applicant in Jail, the second bail application is allowed. 9. Let applicant-Jogendra alias Raju involved in Case Crime No. 493 of 1999, under Sections 498-A/304-B, I. P. C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Sardhana, district Meerut be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the C. J. M. /court concerned. Bail allowed. .