Fatima and another v. State of U.P.), copy of the order is annexed as annexure

2. Heard Sri Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Rahmat Ali, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 194 of 2024, under Section 108 BNS, registered at Police Station Itwa, District Siddharth Nagar.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 21.11.2024 by Smt. Rahibunnisha against the applicant and two other persons alleging therein that her daughter was married around 8 years back with the applicant. After marriage the accused persons used to beat and torture her daughter regarding which she lodged a case which is going on. After settlement in Panchayat around a month back she was sent to her matrimonial house. On 17.11.2024 the accused persons assaulted her daughter due to which she consumed some poisonous substance and committed suicide. Report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the although the applicant is the husband but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the postmortem examination report of the deceased shows that she did not receive any bodily injury and the cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. It is submitted that the present case is a case of suicide. It is submitted that there is no abetment and instigation of any kind by the applicant which has any nexus with the death of the deceased. The applicant has no mens-rea at all. There is no overt act whatsoever of the applicant which resulted in the death of the deceased, the applicant has no motive at all to commit the aforesaid offence. It is further submitted that co-accused Fatima and Jangi 2 BAIL No. 25194 of 2025 Miyan have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.04.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 3136 of 2025 (Fatima and another Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order is annexed as annexure 10 to the affidavit. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 33 of the affidavit and is in jail since 25.11.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused have been granted bail.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the deceased was not found to have received any bodily injury. There was some matrimonial discord between the applicant and the victim. There is no abetment and instigation of any kind by the applicant which has any nexus with the death of the deceased. The applicant has no mens-rea at all. There is no overt act whatsoever of the applicant which resulted in the death of the deceased, the applicant has no motive at all to commit the aforesaid offence. Co-accused Fatima and Jangi Miyan have been granted bail.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant Rahmat Ali, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate 3 BAIL No. 25194 of 2025 proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 25, 2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal,J.)

2. Heard Sri Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Rahmat Ali, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 194 of 2024, under Section 108 BNS, registered at Police Station Itwa, District Siddharth Nagar.

4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 21.11.2024 by Smt. Rahibunnisha against the applicant and two other persons alleging therein that her daughter was married around 8 years back with the applicant. After marriage the accused persons used to beat and torture her daughter regarding which she lodged a case which is going on. After settlement in Panchayat around a month back she was sent to her matrimonial house. On 17.11.2024 the accused persons assaulted her daughter due to which she consumed some poisonous substance and committed suicide. Report be lodged and action be taken.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the although the applicant is the husband but he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the postmortem examination report of the deceased shows that she did not receive any bodily injury and the cause of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. It is submitted that the present case is a case of suicide. It is submitted that there is no abetment and instigation of any kind by the applicant which has any nexus with the death of the deceased. The applicant has no mens-rea at all. There is no overt act whatsoever of the applicant which resulted in the death of the deceased, the applicant has no motive at all to commit the aforesaid offence. It is further submitted that co-accused Fatima and Jangi 2 BAIL No. 25194 of 2025 Miyan have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.04.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 3136 of 2025 (Fatima and another Vs. State of U.P.), copy of the order is annexed as annexure 10 to the affidavit. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 33 of the affidavit and is in jail since 25.11.2024.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that the co-accused have been granted bail.

7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the deceased was not found to have received any bodily injury. There was some matrimonial discord between the applicant and the victim. There is no abetment and instigation of any kind by the applicant which has any nexus with the death of the deceased. The applicant has no mens-rea at all. There is no overt act whatsoever of the applicant which resulted in the death of the deceased, the applicant has no motive at all to commit the aforesaid offence. Co-accused Fatima and Jangi Miyan have been granted bail.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

9. Let the applicant Rahmat Ali, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate 3 BAIL No. 25194 of 2025 proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

11. The bail application is allowed.

12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 25, 2025 M. ARIF (Samit Gopal,J.)