Raju v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.

#1. Heard Sri Janardan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nikhil Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

#2. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 17.3.2025 in Case Crime No. 0078 of 2025 u/s 108 B.N.S., P.S. Paraspur, District Gonda. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.

#3. Attention has been drawn towards impugned F.I.R. wherein the date of incident is dated 27.2.2025 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 1.3.2025 without explaining the delay. The present applicant is husband of the deceased and they got married in the year 2016. The relation of the present applicant with his wife was cordial and out of aforesaid wedlock the present applicant has been blessed with one son. As per the prosecution story on account of torturous behaviour of the present applicant his wife committed suicide. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that so as to attract the relevant ingredients of section 108 B.N.S. there must be an over or positive act of the accused to instigate or abet the victim to commit suicide. In the present case there is no overt or positive act of the present applicant. Attention has been drawn towards the dictum of Apex Court in re : Jayedeepsinh Pravinsinh Chavda and others vs. State of Gujarat : (2025) 2 Supreme Court Cases 116 wherein vide para 34 the Apex Court has held that only on account of harassment of the victim (since deceased) by her in-laws if the victim commits suicide, the offence of section 108 B.N.S.S. could not be made out. Para 34 aforesaid is being quoted as under : "34. Mere harassment and such issues between the wife and her husband along with the in-laws do not appear to create a scenario where she was left with no option other than to end her life. There is, therefore, absence of mens rea to instigate suicide of the deceased person. Therefore, prima facie, it appears that the appellants did not have the requisite mens rea and neither did they commit any positive or direct act or omission to instigate or aid in the commission of suicide by the deceased."

#4. Learned counsel has also stated that the present applicant has no criminal history of any kind whatsoever. Charge-sheet has been filed in this case.

#5. The learned counsel for the applicant has given an undertaking on behalf of applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail, if granted.

#6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

#7. Without entering into the merits of the case and considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, contents and allegations of the F.I.R., the fact that to attract the relevant ingredients of section 108 B.N.S. there must be an overt or positive act of the accused to instigate or abet the victim to commit suicide but in the present case there is no overt or positive act of the present applicant, as held by Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment mere harassment and such issues between the wife and her husband along with the in-laws does not create a scenario which can left the wife option-less but to commit suicide and the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

#8. Bail application is allowed.

#9. Let the applicant Raju, involved in aforesaid case 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he / she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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. (ii) The applicant 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 / her under Section 269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him / her in accordance with law, under Section 208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) 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 351 of B.N.S.S., 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 / her in accordance with law. . Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Om (Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.) OM PRAKASH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench