Ramesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

The present anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C./ 482 BNSS has been filed by the accused-applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR/Case Crime No. 54 of 2026, under Sections 108, 115 (2), 351 (2), 333 BNS, 2023 (old Section 306, 323, 503 and 452 IPC) Police Station Kotwali, District Unnao.

¶14

The brief facts of the present case are that a First Information Report (FIR) has been lodged under Sections 108, 115 (2), 351 (2), 333 BNS, 2023 (old Section 306, 323, 503 and 452 IPC) against five named accused persons including the present applicant alleging therein that the son of the informant namely Lalit had committed suicide between 2 A.M. to 4 A.M. on 29.1.2026. It is further alleged therein that on 28.01.2026, daughter of present applicant had eloped and in afternoon at about 1-2 P.M., the applicant accompanied with his brother and wife forcibly took out deceased and beaten him badly, thereafter, they took him to the Police Station. It has also been alleged therein that the named accused persons had demanded Rs. 12 lakhs for closing the matter and due to which his son has committed suicide.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the alleged cruelty/harassment made by the applicant and other named accused persons is not enough to constitute the offence under Section 108 of BNS, 2023 rather it must be done either with the intention to cause grave injury or to drive him to commit suicide or with intention to coerce him.

¶16

It is further submitted that merely on the basis of suspicion, the applicant has been

¶17

NABAIL No. 737 of 2026

¶18

2

¶19

made accused in the FIR alongwith four other persons.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has nothing to do with the said incident as alleged in the FIR. The investigation is still going on.

¶21

It is further submitted that the ingredient of Section 108 BNS, 2023 i.e. Abetment is not attracted in the present case for the reason that to constitute the offence of abetment, there must be a course of conduct or action of intentionally aiding or facilitating another person to end his life.

¶22

It is further submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gurucharan Singh vs. State of Punjab [2017 (1) SCC 433] has held that to constitute abetment, intention and involvement of the accused to aid or instigate commission of suicide is imperative. Any severance or absence of any of these constituents would militate against the indictment. There must be evidence that an accused intended by such act(s) to instigate the deceased to commit suicide.

¶23

Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Geo Varghese Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors. (2021) INSC 618 wherein it has been held that there must be an allegation of either direct or indirect act of incitement to the commission of offence of suicide and mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by another person would not be sufficient in itself, unless, there are allegations of such actions on the part of the accused which compelled the commission of suicide.

¶24

It is further submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of Village Jagatkheda, Majre-Magarwara, Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Unnao and the FIR has been lodged at Police Station Kotwali, District Unnao, so there is no chance of absconding and he has specifically pleaded in paragraph no. 4 of the supplementary affidavit filed today before this Court that he will cooperate in the investigation conducted by the Police and he will appear before the Police when the Police would call him for investigation.

¶25

It is further submitted that the applicant is apprehending arrest by the Police and that is why, he has approached this Court by filing the present Anticipatory Bail Application. The applicant has no criminal history.

¶26

On the other hand, learned AGA on the basis of instructions received has submitted that from the contents of the FIR and the statement of informant, the offence is made out against the applicant but unable to dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant particularly applicability of section 108 of BNS, 2023 in absence of the ingredients of the same.

¶27

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the material available on record and considering the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of

¶28

NABAIL No. 737 of 2026

¶29

3

¶30

Gurucharan Singh (supra) and Geo Varghese (supra) and the fact that the ingredient of Section 108 BNS, 2023 prima-facie offence of abetment is not attracted against the applicant for the reason that to constitute the offence of abetment, there must be a course of conduct or action of intentionally aiding or facilitating another person to end his life, which is prima-facie not present in this case; in the FIR it is not alleged as to what manner in which, the applicant was harassing the deceased, it is just a bald allegation/ averment on mere suspicion.

¶31

In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [AIR 1994 SC 1349] , the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief source of corruption in the police. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the peculiar case the arrest of an accused should be made.

¶32

In view of the aforesaid facts and looking into the circumstances, it is found that there is a case registered against the applicant with general and omnibus in nature and it cannot be definitely said when the police may arrest the applicant. After the lodging of FIR the arrest can be made by the police at will. There is no definite period fixed for the police to arrest an accused against whom an FIR has been lodged; as undertaken by the learned counsel for the applicant there is no possibility of his fleeing from the judicial proceedings and in the light of aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, this Court finds it a fit case to issue an interim order of anticipatory bail as per Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./ 482 BNSS, till further orders of this Court.

¶33

In the event of arrest, let the accused-applicant Ramesh be released forthwith on ad-interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting officer/Investigating Officer/ S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-

¶34

(i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;

¶35

(ii). That the accused-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; and

¶36

(iii). That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

¶37

The papers regarding bail submitted to the police officer on behalf of the accused/applicant shall form part of the case diary and would be submitted to the court concerned along with same at the time of submission of report under Section 173(2)

¶38

NABAIL No. 737 of 2026

¶39

4

¶40

Cr.P.C.

¶41

In case there is breach of any of the above conditions or in case it is otherwise found for any other reason the bail is required to be cancelled, it shall be open for the State or the appropriate authority to move application for cancellation of bail in accordance with law.

¶42