Allowed¶20

Virendra Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Apr 2025BAIL/12645/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Sameer Jain, J.; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 12645 of 2025; Virendra Sonkar v. State of U.P.; Section 108 BNS; Case Crime No. 103 of 2025; P.S. Line Bazar, District Jaunpur; abetment of suicide; bail granted 18.04.2025; counsel: Shailendra Kumar Yadav (applicant), Surya Bhan Singh (informant), Ashutosh Singh AGA (State).

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed without expressing any opinion on merits; applicant Virendra Sonkar to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (appearance before trial court, no inducement/threat/tampering, no criminal or anti-social activity); prosecution free to seek cancellation on breach. ¶20

Virendra Sonkar vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, accused in Case Crime No. 103 of 2025 under Section 108 BNS (P.S. Line Bazar, District Jaunpur), is entitled to be released on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶8

Court's answer

Except bald and verbal allegations of abetment, there is no cogent evidence suggesting that due to the abetment of the applicant the deceased committed suicide; the Court finds merit in the applicant-counsel's argument to this effect.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The defence taken by the applicant in the bail application cannot be completely ruled out at this stage.

¶16

Key takeaways

Considering the facts and circumstances discussed (no cogent evidence of abetment, defence not ruled out, no criminal history, custody since 05.03.2025), the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.ratio¶18
The observations made in the judgment are limited to the facts pertaining to disposal of the bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.obiter¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — S. 108 BNS (offence under Case Crime No. 103 of 2025, P.S. Line Bazar, District Jaunpur) — FIR dated 27.02.2025 alleged the applicant made physical relationship with the informant's daughter under threat and that she committed suicide — Allahabad High Court (Sameer Jain, J.) held that except bald and verbal allegations of abetment there was no cogent evidence connecting the applicant's conduct to the suicide; the defence taken could not be completely ruled out at that stage; applicant had no criminal history and was in custody since 05.03.2025 — bail allowed on personal bond and two sureties with usual conditions; observations expressly confined to disposal of the bail application with no bearing on trial merits.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57920

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12645 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Virendra Sonkar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Sri Surya Bhan Singh, learned Advocate filed his power on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Shailendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Surya Bhan Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Ashutosh Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.103 of 2025, under Section 108 BNS, Police Station- Line Bazar, District- Jaunpur, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged on 27.02.2025 against applicant and two others and according to FIR, applicant under threatening made physical relationship with the daughter of the informant and also threatened to eliminate her and this fact has been informed by his daughter two-three days before to her mother and due to the torture of the applicant, she committed suicide.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that on the basis of false allegation, applicant has been made accused in the present matter and except bald and verbal allegation, there is no cogent evidence against the applicant on record.

¶11

He further submitted that actually deceased and applicant were good friends and informant did not like their friendship and deceased was doing preparation of competitive examination but his father settled her marriage against her wishes and only due to this reason she committed suicide and subsequent to her death, on the basis of the false allegation, FIR of the present case was lodged.

¶12

He further submitted that applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 05.03.2025.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant, opposed the prayer for bail and submit that applicant used to torture the deceased and under threat he made physical relationship with her and on the date of incident he also came at her room and this fact is evident from the statement of land-lord of the deceased and, therefore, considering the nature of allegation levelled against the applicant, he should not be released on bail.

¶14

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

¶15

However, as per allegation, due to the conduct of the applicant, deceased committed suicide but this Court finds merits in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that except bald and verbal allegations of abatement, there is no cogent evidence, which can suggest that due to the abatement of the applicant, deceased committed suicide.

¶16

Further, defence taken by the applicant in the instant bail application cannot be completely ruled out, at this stage.

¶17

Further, applicant is not having any criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 05.03.2025.

¶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- Virendra Sonkar 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:-

¶21

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶22

(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.

¶23

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

Order Date :- 18.4.2025 Anurag/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Virendra Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babloo Alias Ranjeet vs State of U.P.

Nisar Ali and 2 Others vs State of U.P.

Rohit vs State of U.P.

Akram vs State of U.P.

Sundar vs State of U.P.

Irshad vs State of U.P.