Rani Devi vs State of U.P.

The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 370 of 2025, under Section 108 B.N.S., Police Station- Bithri Chainpur, District- Bareilly, during the pendency of the trial.

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 20.7.2025. The first information report was lodged on 25.7.2025. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. According to the postmortem report, cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. As per the allegations in the first information report and the material collected during the course of investigation, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out. The applicant, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Nipun Aneja and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.654 of 2017) decided on 03.10.2024 and Abhinav Mohan Delkar vs. The State of Maharashtra and others (Criminal Appeal Nos.2177-2185 of 2024) decided on 18.08.2025 . Investigation has been completed. Charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is in jail since 02.08.2025 having no criminal history and in case, she is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the said liberty.

BAIL No. 43326 of 2025

2

satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that according to the postmortem report, cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. As per the allegations in the first information report and the material collected during the course of investigation, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out. The applicant is a lady and has no criminal antecedents. Further, the applicant has remained confined for almost four months and after submission of the charge sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Let the applicant Rani Devi, involved in the aforesaid case crime 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 the conditions that she:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.