HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34864 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in S.T. No. 143 of 2025 (State vs. Pradeep @ Dimpal) in Case Crime No. 40 of 2025, under Sections 108, 115(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Rendhar, District- Jalaun during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the husband of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 2.5.2025. The first information report was lodged on 6.5.2025. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. According to the postmortem report, cause of death is asphexia due to antemortem hanging. It is next contended that as per the allegations in the first information report and material collected during the course of investigation, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S., are not made out against the applicant. 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 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 applicant has no criminal history. Charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant is in jail Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Pandey, Shashi Kant Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pradeep @ Dimpal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) since 8.5.2025. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. for the State 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 the delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. According to the postmortem report, cause of death is asphexia due to antemortem hanging. The necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S., are not made out against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further the applicant has presently remained confined for more than five 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 intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant, Pradeep @ Dimpal involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his 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 applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant 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 10, 2025 S.S. BAIL No. 34864 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad