HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33242 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Nasir Hussain, counsel for the informant. Perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 260 of 2025, under Sections 108, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Mandi, District- Saharanpur during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant no.1 is the wife and applicant no. 2 is the mother-in-law of the deceased. According to the postmortem report, cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Viscera was preserved and was sent for chemical analysis. F.S.L. report is still awaited. It is next contended that as per the allegations in the first information report, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S., are not made out against the applicants. The applicants, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgements 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 and Laxmi Das vs. The State of West Bengal and Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 706 of 2017) decided on 21.01.2025. The applicants do not have any criminal history. The applicants being ladies are Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anurag Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Nasir Hussain Shalu And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) in jail since 13.8.2025. In case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. 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 as a result of antemortem hanging. Viscera was preserved and was sent for chemical analysis. F.S.L. report is still awaited. Further, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S., are not made out against the applicants. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicants have presently remained confined for almost 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 applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicants, Shalu and Mamtesh involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 9, 2025 S.S. BAIL No. 33242 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad