JUDGMENT : Ram Krishna Gautam, J. Heard Over application for grant of anticipatory bail moved under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by Subhawati Devi in Case Crime No. 185 of 2017, under Sections 306 I.P.C., Police Station Jathan Bazar, District Kushinagar. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that applicant being a lady has been falsely implicated whereas this case crime number was got registered for offence punishable under Sections 304-B,498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, at above police station Jathan Bazar, District Kushinagar but investigation resulted exoneration of accused Purnvasi (father-in-law) and Sunita (sister-in-law) though informant in his statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has said that it was a case of accident, hence, this anticipatory bail application. 3. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. 4. Informant was not witness present on spot rather he found his daughter under burn and subsequently he got this case lodged for offence of dowry death against husband and in-laws. Investigation resulted exoneration of father-in-law and mother-in-law, leaving behind husband and mother-in-law (present applicant) there is dying declaration recorded by Magistrate wherein accusation is against applicant. Looking to the nature and gravity of accusation and the heinousness of offence, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. In view of aforesaid, the application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, rejected.