High Court · 2025

1. Counter affidavit alongwith Vakalatnama filed today by learned counsel for the complainant is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 343 of 2024, under section 108 of BNS, P.S.- Ahirauli, District - Ambedkar Nagar.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the deceased had hanged herself and committed suicide on 30.11.2024 and thereafter, the mother of the deceased informed the police station concerned that the deceased was suffering with acute depression and therefore, she committed suicide and a copy of the letter/ information is appended alongwith bail application. It has further been stated that the informant of the present FIR is father of the deceased, who was then at some other place and was not present on the spot and when he returned back on the next date, on instance of the other person of the village, who were having enmity with the present applicant, lodged the FIR while concocting the story. He next added that the applicant has no involvement in committing offence and he is a law abiding citizen and the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 03.12.2024. Further, the charge-sheet has been filed and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant in fact was not present on the spot and on the instance of other persons who misled the applicant to lodge the FIR, he went to the police station and lodged the FIR. He added that he has no knowledge that who has committed the offence.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that letter, which was submitted before the police station concerned was by the mother of the deceased and even the mother was not present on the spot. He submits that it is a clear cut case of abatement of suicide and as such the applicant is not entitled for bail.

7. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the deceased had committed suicide and as per the information given by the mother of the deceased she was in acute depression which is evident from the letter appended alongwith the bail application. This Court has taken note of the fact that the father, who was not present on spot lodged the FIR after three days of the incident and he while filing the counter affidavit before this Court has stated that some persons of the village misled him and as a result, he lodged the FIR. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.12.2024; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

8. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

9. Let the applicant- Pravesh Yadav involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 7.2.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Counter affidavit alongwith Vakalatnama filed today by learned counsel for the complainant is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 343 of 2024, under section 108 of BNS, P.S.- Ahirauli, District - Ambedkar Nagar.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the deceased had hanged herself and committed suicide on 30.11.2024 and thereafter, the mother of the deceased informed the police station concerned that the deceased was suffering with acute depression and therefore, she committed suicide and a copy of the letter/ information is appended alongwith bail application. It has further been stated that the informant of the present FIR is father of the deceased, who was then at some other place and was not present on the spot and when he returned back on the next date, on instance of the other person of the village, who were having enmity with the present applicant, lodged the FIR while concocting the story. He next added that the applicant has no involvement in committing offence and he is a law abiding citizen and the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 03.12.2024. Further, the charge-sheet has been filed and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant in fact was not present on the spot and on the instance of other persons who misled the applicant to lodge the FIR, he went to the police station and lodged the FIR. He added that he has no knowledge that who has committed the offence.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that letter, which was submitted before the police station concerned was by the mother of the deceased and even the mother was not present on the spot. He submits that it is a clear cut case of abatement of suicide and as such the applicant is not entitled for bail.

7. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the deceased had committed suicide and as per the information given by the mother of the deceased she was in acute depression which is evident from the letter appended alongwith the bail application. This Court has taken note of the fact that the father, who was not present on spot lodged the FIR after three days of the incident and he while filing the counter affidavit before this Court has stated that some persons of the village misled him and as a result, he lodged the FIR. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.12.2024; prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

8. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail.

9. Let the applicant- Pravesh Yadav involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 7.2.2025 Mohd. Sharif MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench