Vishal Rajpoot vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16078 of 2026

Vishal Rajpoot

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: G.S.Chauhan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 64

¶6

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶7

Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri N.K. Sharma, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 497 of 2025, under Section 108 B.N.S., Police Station- Nawabad, District- Jhansi, during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 24.7.2025, whereas the application under Section 173(4) B.N.S.S. for registration of the first information report was filed on 01.9.2025. The first information report was lodged subsequently on 14.12.2025 under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2)(a) and 316(2) B.N.S. The inordinate delay in filing the application under Section 173(4) B.N.S.S. is fatal to the prosecution case. During the course of investigation, on the basis of statement of the witnesses, namely Sumit Sahu and Shiv Varma, the case was converted under Section 108 B.N.S. The allegations in the first information report, in brief, are that the deceased had been living in a live-in relationship with the applicant for the past two years. The deceased used to visit the informant and her family members daily and informed that the applicant had trapped her in his love affair, established physical relations, secretly made obscene video and used to threaten to make them viral and defame her, despite the fact that the applicant was already married. The first information report further states that on 23.7.2025 at about 11.00 a.m. the deceased informed that the applicant had called her on phone and was pressurizing her to establish physical relations with his friends. When the deceased refused, she was threatened and assaulted. On the next day, the informant came to know that the deceased had allegedly committed suicide by hanging herself from a

¶10

BAIL No. 16078 of 2026

¶11

2

¶12

ceiling fan with a dupatta . It is contended that no indecent photograph/video of the deceased was recovered by the Investigating Officer. As per the postmortem report, cause of death is asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. Further, as per the allegations in the first information report and the material collected during the course of investigation, the essential 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. The prosecution case, as it stands, does not disclose the mens rea or proximate act required to attract the said provision. 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 . The applicant is in jail since 09.04.2026 having no criminal antecedents and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶13

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶14

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the inordinate delay in filing the application under Section 173(4) B.N.S.S. is fatal to the prosecution case. As per the allegations in the first information report, statement of the witnesses, namely Sumit Sahu and Shiv Varma and the material collected during the course of investigation, the essential ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out. No obscene photograph/video of the deceased was recovered by the Investigating Officer. Except, the statement of the mother of the deceased, there is no proximate or direct act attributable to the applicant that could be construed as instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid to the commission of suicide. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than one month and 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.

¶15

Let the applicant Vishal Rajpoot , 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 he:

¶16

BAIL No. 16078 of 2026

¶17

3

¶18