Shubham Kumar Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16503 of 2026

Shubham Kumar Kashyap

	.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Manvendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 64

¶5

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶6

Heard counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-opposite party. Perused the material available on record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 77 of 2026, under Section 108 B.N.S., Police Station- Kotwali, District- Fatehpur, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the postmortem reports of the three deceased, cause of death is ' shock as a result of ante mortem cut throat injury and viscera, blood sample and stomach content were preserved for chemical analysis concentration and expert opinion, nail clipping and nail scraping wee preserved for foreign body traces' . Placing reliance upon the statement of the informant recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. it is contended that the deceased had taken loan from the applicant and other co-accused and was unable to repay the same, on account of which he committed suicide. Further, as per the allegations in the first information report, the statement of the informant recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., the alleged

¶9

BAIL No. 16503 of 2026

¶10

2

¶11

suicide note of the deceased 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 three deceased. Merely on the allegations of harassment, the applicant has been implicated 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 Mahendra Awase vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.221 of 2025) decided on 17.01.2025, 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 11.3.2026 having no criminal history. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶12

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

¶13

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that as per the allegations in the first information report, the statement of the informant recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., the alleged suicide note of the deceased 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. 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 remained confined for more than two months 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

¶14

BAIL No. 16503 of 2026

¶15

3

¶16

enlarged on bail.

¶17

Let the applicant Shubham Kumar Kashyap, 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:

¶18