JUDGMENT : Alok Kumar Verma, J. This is the Second Bail Application. The First Bail Application (No.1086 of 2019) was dismissed on 06.01.2022. 2. The present applicant – accused Ravi Kumar is in judicial custody for the offence under Sections 498A, 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in connection with the First Information Report No.307 of 2018, registered at police station Transit Camp, District Udham Singh Nagar. 3. As per the First Information Report dated 05.12.2018, lodged by Rajendra Kumar, father of the deceased, the marriage of his daughter, namely Smt. Shivani was solemnized with the present applicant two years six months ago, as per the Hindu rites. After the marriage, applicant started harassing and torturing the deceased for the demand of dowry in the shape of Rs.1,00,000/- and one motorcycle. The said demand was not fulfilled by the informant. Due to that reason, the informant brought back the deceased to his house. The applicant went to the house of the informant after two months and took the deceased with him. On 02.12.2018, applicant committed the murder of the deceased due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Upon conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed. 4. Heard Mr. Sandeep Adhikari, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the applicant through video conferencing and Mr. M.K. Chand, learned AGA for the State. 5. Mr. Sandeep Adhikari, Advocate, contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this matter. He never demanded any dowry. The deceased had illegal relationship with a person. Earlier, she ran away with that person then her father with the help of others took her back and handed over to the applicant. There was an altercation between the applicant and the deceased regarding this matter. That’s why she consumed poison. Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. He is a permanent resident of District Bareilly, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding, and, he is in judicial custody since 21.12.2018. 6. The objection has not been filed by the State despite getting ample opportunity to file the same. Mr. M.K. Chand, learned AGA for the State has opposed the bail application orally. 7. Admittedly, the prosecution has not yet concluded its evidence, while the applicant is in judicial custody since 21.12.2018. 8. 6. The objection has not been filed by the State despite getting ample opportunity to file the same. Mr. M.K. Chand, learned AGA for the State has opposed the bail application orally. 7. Admittedly, the prosecution has not yet concluded its evidence, while the applicant is in judicial custody since 21.12.2018. 8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merit of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. 9. The Second Bail Application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant – Ravi Kumar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions:- i) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment; ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. 11. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail.