State of U.P. and Another v. Counsel for
Case Details
2-Heard Mr. Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Mr. Sunder Singh, learned counsel for the complainant. 3-As per the prosecution case in brief, complainant-Tarun who is brother of the deceased got a first information report lodged on 19.07.2025 at 00:46 hours for the offence under Section 103(1) B.N.S., 2023 against Pankaj, Santosh (present applicant), Subhash who are husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased respectively and against Sagar, who is cousin of co- accused Pankaj stating inter-alia that the marriage of his sister was solemnized on 24.04.2013 with Pankaj and from their wedlock, two children were born who are presently aged about 11 years and 6 years respectively. F.I.R. further alleges that just a little while ago, his sister was being harassed in her matrimonial home and several times, she told about her harassment but she was consoled. On 18.05.2025, deceased made a phone call to her sister at 11:15 a.m. and told everything which was happening with her and had a conversation with her for about 45 minutes and deceased had also sent her photographs. Deceased's sister in-turn informed the 2 NABAIL No. 8111 of 2025 complainant, who thereafter reached at the matrimonial home of the deceased at about 05:15 o'clock and found that his sister was lying dead on a bed. The allegation has also been levelled that his sister was strangulated to death in her matrimonial home. 4-It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and is aged about 62 years old. She has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of vague allegations. He next submits that the marriage of the deceased with the son of the applicant was solemnized about 12 years back and as per own case of the prosecution, earlier there was no complaint about the ill behaviour of in-laws of the deceased. He, further relying upon the statement of eye witness, namely, Saksham who is son of the deceased, submits that he has stated inter-alia that on 18.07.2025, his mother Chaya (deceased) had cooked food and they all had lunch together. After having a lunch, some altercation took place between his mother and grand- mother and thereafter they both were scolded by his father. Thereafter mother went to the terrace for washing clothes but did not come back. After long time, he went to the terrace but did not find his mother. When he tried to open the door of the room situated on the terrace, it was locked from the inside. Then he placed a ladder on the terrace near the door, peered through the glass above the door and saw that his mother was hanging from a ceiling fan. Then he immediately informed his father and other family members. Younger son of deceased, namely, Satvik has also given the same statement. Much emphasis has been given by contending that though during investigation, case was converted under Section 85 and 108 of B.N.S., 2023 on 19.07.2025 but considering the evidence available on record, there is no material of abetment or instigation on the part of the applicant to constitute the offence under Section 85 and 108 of B.N.S., 2023. It is further submitted that in fact, deceased was suffering from allergic rhinits, hyperventilation syndrome and fibroadenoma breast disease since long, therefore, she went under depression and committed suicide. It is also pointed out that co-accused Pankaj who is husband of the deceased has been arrested and he is languishing in jail since 12.08.2025. It is next submitted that charge-sheet, against co- accused Pankaj and Shubhash has been submitted, whereas the investigation against the present applicant is pending. Applicant has no criminal history to her credit. Pursuant to F.I.R. of this case, 3 NABAIL No. 8111 of 2025 the applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest. Lastly, it is submitted that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she would not misuse investigation of this case. liberty and will co-operate with 5-Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant in the light of first information report by contending that deceased committed suicide on account of harassment and torture of the accused persons. family member have supported 6-On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant, taking a contrary view, submits that it is not a case of suicide but a case of the deceased-Smt. Chaya by strangulation. The murder of complainant and his prosecution case. He has vehemently urged that the investigating office has not conducted a fair investigation and in-collusion with the accused persons converted the case from Section 103(1) B.N.S. to Section 85 and 108 of B.N.S. He also submits that when the complainant reached to the matrimonial home of the deceased, all the family members of the deceased seeing him ran away from the house leaving the dead body of the deceased, which shows their unnatural conduct, therefore, anticipatory bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 7-Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that it is not in dispute that the marriage of the deceased with son of the applicant was solemnized 12 years back and prosecution has come up with a stand that from few days ago, Smt. Chaya was being subjected to torture and harassment by her in-laws. It is also not in dispute that for the very first time, Saksham who is son of the deceased has seen that his mother was hanging from a ceiling fan and he immediately informed to his father and other family members. Thereafter, dead body of the deceased was brought down and she was taken to the hospital where she was declared dead by the Dr. Kapil Tomar. The information about the said incident was given to the police by PRD Head Constable Vikram Singh, on which the police reached at the house of applicant. As per statement of Yogesh, who is a witness of inquest, the dead body of the deceased lying on a bed on the second floor of house. As per the statement of independent witnesses i.e. Saksham, Satvik, Ravindra Sharma, Vikas Kumar, Harendra, Mohd. Wakeel and Javed, the dead body of the 4 NABAIL No. 8111 of 2025 deceased was taken out from a room after breaking it's door which was bolted from the inside. In the inquest report, it is also mentioned that at the time when police reached at the spot, family members were also present there and in the opinion of Panch Witnesses, deceased died by committing suicide. The said fact is also corroborates from the post-mortem report, wherein, cause of death of the deceased was found asphyxia as a result of hanging. 8-Since the allegation of the prosecution and defence of the accused are still open to be urged before the trial court and the investigation is going on, therefore, this Court is not recording any finding on the merits of the case, however, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, submissions raised on behalf of parties, reasonable apprehension of arrest of applicant, taking into consideration the gravity and nature of accusation, materials on record, there being no criminal antecedents of the applicant and there being no possibility of her fleeing from justice, this Court is of the view that prima-facie applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 9-Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant-Santosh involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned till the submission of police report, if any, under section 193(3) B.N.S.S. with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. (ii) 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. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. (iv) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above or in case it is found that applicant has obtained this order concealing any material facts, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 5 NABAIL No. 8111 of 2025 10-It is clarified that anything said in this order at this stage is limited to the purpose of determination of this anticipatory bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. 11-With the aforesaid directions, this anticipatory bail application stands allowed. October 8, 2025 Saurabh (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2-Heard Mr. Gaurav Kakkar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Mr. Sunder Singh, learned counsel for the complainant. 3-As per the prosecution case in brief, complainant-Tarun who is brother of the deceased got a first information report lodged on 19.07.2025 at 00:46 hours for the offence under Section 103(1) B.N.S., 2023 against Pankaj, Santosh (present applicant), Subhash who are husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased respectively and against Sagar, who is cousin of co- accused Pankaj stating inter-alia that the marriage of his sister was solemnized on 24.04.2013 with Pankaj and from their wedlock, two children were born who are presently aged about 11 years and 6 years respectively. F.I.R. further alleges that just a little while ago, his sister was being harassed in her matrimonial home and several times, she told about her harassment but she was consoled. On 18.05.2025, deceased made a phone call to her sister at 11:15 a.m. and told everything which was happening with her and had a conversation with her for about 45 minutes and deceased had also sent her photographs. Deceased's sister in-turn informed the 2 NABAIL No. 8111 of 2025 complainant, who thereafter reached at the matrimonial home of the deceased at about 05:15 o'clock and found that his sister was lying dead on a bed. The allegation has also been levelled that his sister was strangulated to death in her matrimonial home. 4-It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is mother-in-law of the deceased and is aged about 62 years old. She has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of vague allegations. He next submits that the marriage of the deceased with the son of the applicant was solemnized about 12 years back and as per own case of the prosecution, earlier there was no complaint about the ill behaviour of in-laws of the deceased. He, further relying upon the statement of eye witness, namely, Saksham who is son of the deceased, submits that he has stated inter-alia that on 18.07.2025, his mother Chaya (deceased) had cooked food and they all had lunch together. After having a lunch, some altercation took place between his mother and grand- mother and thereafter they both were scolded by his father. Thereafter mother went to the terrace for washing clothes but did not come back. After long time, he went to the terrace but did not find his mother. When he tried to open the door of the room situated on the terrace, it was locked from the inside. Then he placed a ladder on the terrace near the door, peered through the glass above the door and saw that his mother was hanging from a ceiling fan. Then he immediately informed his father and other family members. Younger son of deceased, namely, Satvik has also given the same statement. Much emphasis has been given by contending that though during investigation, case was converted under Section 85 and 108 of B.N.S., 2023 on 19.07.2025 but considering the evidence available on record, there is no material of abetment or instigation on the part of the applicant to constitute the offence under Section 85 and 108 of B.N.S., 2023. It is further submitted that in fact, deceased was suffering from allergic rhinits, hyperventilation syndrome and fibroadenoma breast disease since long, therefore, she went under depression and committed suicide. It is also pointed out that co-accused Pankaj who is husband of the deceased has been arrested and he is languishing in jail since 12.08.2025. It is next submitted that charge-sheet, against co- accused Pankaj and Shubhash has been submitted, whereas the investigation against the present applicant is pending. Applicant has no criminal history to her credit. Pursuant to F.I.R. of this case, 3 NABAIL No. 8111 of 2025 the applicant has apprehension of imminent arrest. Lastly, it is submitted that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, she would not misuse investigation of this case. liberty and will co-operate with 5-Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant in the light of first information report by contending that deceased committed suicide on account of harassment and torture of the accused persons. family member have supported 6-On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant, taking a contrary view, submits that it is not a case of suicide but a case of the deceased-Smt. Chaya by strangulation. The murder of complainant and his prosecution case. He has vehemently urged that the investigating office has not conducted a fair investigation and in-collusion with the accused persons converted the case from Section 103(1) B.N.S. to Section 85 and 108 of B.N.S. He also submits that when the complainant reached to the matrimonial home of the deceased, all the family members of the deceased seeing him ran away from the house leaving the dead body of the deceased, which shows their unnatural conduct, therefore, anticipatory bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 7-Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that it is not in dispute that the marriage of the deceased with son of the applicant was solemnized 12 years back and prosecution has come up with a stand that from few days ago, Smt. Chaya was being subjected to torture and harassment by her in-laws. It is also not in dispute that for the very first time, Saksham who is son of the deceased has seen that his mother was hanging from a ceiling fan and he immediately informed to his father and other family members. Thereafter, dead body of the deceased was brought down and she was taken to the hospital where she was declared dead by the Dr. Kapil Tomar. The information about the said incident was given to the police by PRD Head Constable Vikram Singh, on which the police reached at the house of applicant. As per statement of Yogesh, who is a witness of inquest, the dead body of the deceased lying on a bed on the second floor of house. As per the statement of independent witnesses i.e. Saksham, Satvik, Ravindra Sharma, Vikas Kumar, Harendra, Mohd. Wakeel and Javed, the dead body of the 4 NABAIL No. 8111 of 2025 deceased was taken out from a room after breaking it's door which was bolted from the inside. In the inquest report, it is also mentioned that at the time when police reached at the spot, family members were also present there and in the opinion of Panch Witnesses, deceased died by committing suicide. The said fact is also corroborates from the post-mortem report, wherein, cause of death of the deceased was found asphyxia as a result of hanging. 8-Since the allegation of the prosecution and defence of the accused are still open to be urged before the trial court and the investigation is going on, therefore, this Court is not recording any finding on the merits of the case, however, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, submissions raised on behalf of parties, reasonable apprehension of arrest of applicant, taking into consideration the gravity and nature of accusation, materials on record, there being no criminal antecedents of the applicant and there being no possibility of her fleeing from justice, this Court is of the view that prima-facie applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 9-Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant-Santosh involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned till the submission of police report, if any, under section 193(3) B.N.S.S. with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. (ii) 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. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court. (iv) In default of any of the conditions mentioned above or in case it is found that applicant has obtained this order concealing any material facts, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. 5 NABAIL No. 8111 of 2025 10-It is clarified that anything said in this order at this stage is limited to the purpose of determination of this anticipatory bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. 11-With the aforesaid directions, this anticipatory bail application stands allowed. October 8, 2025 Saurabh (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad