High Court · 2025

1. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of the informant by Shri Laxmi Kant Dixit, Advocate is taken on record.

2. On a query being put, Shri Nikhil Singh, learned A.G.A.-I submitted that he has complete instructions in the matter, as such, this Court proceeded to hear the matter on merits.

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

4. The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.0349 of 2025, under Section 108 of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station - Thakurganj, District - Lucknow.

5. While pressing the instant application, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

6. He further stated that a bare perusal of FIR would show that there is no allegation based upon which Section 108 of BNS, 2023 (akin to Section 306 IPC) can be attracted. He says that for the purposes of offence under Section 108 of BNS (akin to Section 306 IPC), the prosecution has to allege and prove that the deceased was abetted/instigated by the accused immediately before committing suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, implication or conviction in terms of Section 108 of BNS (akin to Section 306 IPC) is not sustainable. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 108 of BNS (akin to Section 306 IPC) there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. This aspect is missing in this case. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court passed in the case of Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2020) 10 SCC 200. Learned counsel for the applicant has further placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court passed in the case of Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan and Another reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 873. Learned counsel for the applicant based upon the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment dated 05.03.2024 passed in the case of Prabhat Kumar Mishra Alias Prabhat Mishra vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2024) 3 SCC 665, submits that only based upon the suicide note, the judgment of conviction cannot be passed and for convicting an accused under Section 108 of BNS (akin to Section 306 IPC) the prosecution is under obligation to prove essential ingredients indicated under Section 108 of BNS (akin to Sections 306) and 45 of BNS (akin to Section 107 IPC). In these circumstances, the applicant, who has no criminal history and languishing in jail since 27.06.2025, is entitled to be released on bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial and would also not influence the prosecution witnesses.

7. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant, however, they could not dispute the above contentions made by the applicant's counsel.

8. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the informant and going through the contents of the application, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents and also that the applicant is having no criminal history and without going into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the application has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

9. Let the applicant - Smt. Sunita Shukla @ Meena be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :- (i) The applicant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence. (v) 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. (vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The applicant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

10. In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

11. As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 ML/- MUNNA LAL MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

1. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of the informant by Shri Laxmi Kant Dixit, Advocate is taken on record.

2. On a query being put, Shri Nikhil Singh, learned A.G.A.-I submitted that he has complete instructions in the matter, as such, this Court proceeded to hear the matter on merits.

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

4. The present application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.0349 of 2025, under Section 108 of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station - Thakurganj, District - Lucknow.

5. While pressing the instant application, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

6. He further stated that a bare perusal of FIR would show that there is no allegation based upon which Section 108 of BNS, 2023 (akin to Section 306 IPC) can be attracted. He says that for the purposes of offence under Section 108 of BNS (akin to Section 306 IPC), the prosecution has to allege and prove that the deceased was abetted/instigated by the accused immediately before committing suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, implication or conviction in terms of Section 108 of BNS (akin to Section 306 IPC) is not sustainable. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 108 of BNS (akin to Section 306 IPC) there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. This aspect is missing in this case. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court passed in the case of Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2020) 10 SCC 200. Learned counsel for the applicant has further placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court passed in the case of Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan and Another reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 873. Learned counsel for the applicant based upon the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment dated 05.03.2024 passed in the case of Prabhat Kumar Mishra Alias Prabhat Mishra vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2024) 3 SCC 665, submits that only based upon the suicide note, the judgment of conviction cannot be passed and for convicting an accused under Section 108 of BNS (akin to Section 306 IPC) the prosecution is under obligation to prove essential ingredients indicated under Section 108 of BNS (akin to Sections 306) and 45 of BNS (akin to Section 107 IPC). In these circumstances, the applicant, who has no criminal history and languishing in jail since 27.06.2025, is entitled to be released on bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial and would also not influence the prosecution witnesses.

7. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant, however, they could not dispute the above contentions made by the applicant's counsel.

8. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A., learned counsel for the informant and going through the contents of the application, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents and also that the applicant is having no criminal history and without going into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the application has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

9. Let the applicant - Smt. Sunita Shukla @ Meena be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions :- (i) The applicant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence. (v) 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. (vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The applicant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

10. In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

11. As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 ML/- MUNNA LAL MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench