High Court · 2025

Deepak Yadav, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Hare Ram Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Santosh Nigam, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 255 of 2024, under Sections 108, 351(3), 352 BNS, Police Station- Barhaj, District- Deoria, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 08.09.2024 against applicant and her family members and according to FIR, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the son of the informant on

24.05.2021 and after marriage, applicant used to torture her husband and always insisted him to live separately and due to her torture, on 10.08.2024 he committed suicide.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is wife of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation of torture, she has been made accused in the present matter.

6. He further submitted that as per prosecution, deceased i.e. husband of the applicant committed suicide on 10.08.2024 but in spite of that FIR was lodged on 08.09.2024 i.e. after about one month and this inordinate delay in lodging the FIR itself suggests that it is based on false and frivolous facts.

7. He further submitted that however, during investigation, informant produced a suicide note of his son after two months from the date of incident and according to it, due to torture of applicant and her family members, deceased committed suicide but till date, it could not be established that the alleged suicide note was in the hand writing of the deceased and this fact is evident from the FSL report, which has been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit dated 06.02.2025 filed in support of the instant bail application. He further submitted that even the alleged suicide note appears to vague in nature as in the suicide note, it has not been mentioned, why applicant and her family members tortured the deceased.

8. He further submitted that if due to matrimonial dispute, husband committed suicide then his wife cannot be held responsible for his death. He further submitted that there is no cogent evidence of abatement against the applicant.

9. He further submitted that applicant is lady and she is detained in jail along with her 2-3 years' old son. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and she is in jail in the present matter since 10.10.2024.

10. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the suicide note of the deceased it is quite apparent that due to torture of the applicant her husband committed suicide but both the counsels could not dispute the fact that as per FSL report, it could not be established that the alleged suicide note was of the deceased. They further could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged after about one month and applicant is lady and she is detained in jail along with her minor son.

11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. As per allegation, applicant, who is wife of the deceased, tortured him along with her family members due to which, he committed suicide but it reflects, FIR was lodged after about a month.

13. Further, however, there is alleged suicide note of the deceased on record but from the FSL report, which has been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application, it reflects that till date, it could not be established that the alleged recovered suicide note was in the hand writing of the deceased.

14. Further, even from the suicide note, it reflects that it is based on vague allegation of torture and in the suicide note, it has not been mentioned that what was the reason of alleged torture.

15. Further, the alleged suicide note was given by the informant to the Investigating Officer after two months from the date of incident.

16. Further, considering entire material available on record, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no cogent evidence of abatement against the applicant on record, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage.

17. Further, applicant is lady and in the present matter, she is detained in jail along with her 2-3 years' old son since 10.10.2024.

18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

20. Let the applicant- Tannu Tiwari be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 KK Patel KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak Yadav, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Hare Ram Pandey, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Santosh Nigam, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

3. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 255 of 2024, under Sections 108, 351(3), 352 BNS, Police Station- Barhaj, District- Deoria, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 08.09.2024 against applicant and her family members and according to FIR, marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the son of the informant on

24.05.2021 and after marriage, applicant used to torture her husband and always insisted him to live separately and due to her torture, on 10.08.2024 he committed suicide.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is wife of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation of torture, she has been made accused in the present matter.

6. He further submitted that as per prosecution, deceased i.e. husband of the applicant committed suicide on 10.08.2024 but in spite of that FIR was lodged on 08.09.2024 i.e. after about one month and this inordinate delay in lodging the FIR itself suggests that it is based on false and frivolous facts.

7. He further submitted that however, during investigation, informant produced a suicide note of his son after two months from the date of incident and according to it, due to torture of applicant and her family members, deceased committed suicide but till date, it could not be established that the alleged suicide note was in the hand writing of the deceased and this fact is evident from the FSL report, which has been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit dated 06.02.2025 filed in support of the instant bail application. He further submitted that even the alleged suicide note appears to vague in nature as in the suicide note, it has not been mentioned, why applicant and her family members tortured the deceased.

8. He further submitted that if due to matrimonial dispute, husband committed suicide then his wife cannot be held responsible for his death. He further submitted that there is no cogent evidence of abatement against the applicant.

9. He further submitted that applicant is lady and she is detained in jail along with her 2-3 years' old son. He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and she is in jail in the present matter since 10.10.2024.

10. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the suicide note of the deceased it is quite apparent that due to torture of the applicant her husband committed suicide but both the counsels could not dispute the fact that as per FSL report, it could not be established that the alleged suicide note was of the deceased. They further could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged after about one month and applicant is lady and she is detained in jail along with her minor son.

11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

12. As per allegation, applicant, who is wife of the deceased, tortured him along with her family members due to which, he committed suicide but it reflects, FIR was lodged after about a month.

13. Further, however, there is alleged suicide note of the deceased on record but from the FSL report, which has been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant bail application, it reflects that till date, it could not be established that the alleged recovered suicide note was in the hand writing of the deceased.

14. Further, even from the suicide note, it reflects that it is based on vague allegation of torture and in the suicide note, it has not been mentioned that what was the reason of alleged torture.

15. Further, the alleged suicide note was given by the informant to the Investigating Officer after two months from the date of incident.

16. Further, considering entire material available on record, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no cogent evidence of abatement against the applicant on record, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage.

17. Further, applicant is lady and in the present matter, she is detained in jail along with her 2-3 years' old son since 10.10.2024.

18. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

19. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

20. Let the applicant- Tannu Tiwari be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

21. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

22. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 KK Patel KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad