HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1379 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. Case Crime No. 73/2025, U/S-108 BNS, Police Station -Dargah Sharif, District- Bahraich. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 21.03.2025, Amarjeet Singh lodged a written report stating that, owing to long-standing enmity, the applicant/accused along with co-accused persons (the in-laws of the deceased) harassed his brother Ranjeet Singh @ Vikram Singh (the deceased). It is further alleged that the applicant/accused took away the deceased’s wife to the house of the co-accused and thereafter refused to send her back. Despite repeated attempts by the deceased for “Bidaai,” the co- accused persons declined and subjected him to harassment. On 14.03.2025, as a result of such harassment, the deceased committed suicide by hanging himself and recorded a video holding the accused persons responsible. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is innocent. Prior to lodging of the FIR on 15.03.2025, the complainant had already submitted a written report alleging that the wife of the deceased had been taken away by the applicant/accused. The deceased had made calls to his wife, Anjani Singh, who refused to return, which allegedly led him to take Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Adarsh Pratap Singh, Mohd. Hanzala Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A Rana Singh @ Jitendra Pratap Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) the extreme step of suicide. 5. It is further submitted that in the statement under Section 180 BNSS, allegations were levelled by the complainant, on the basis of which the applicant is apprehending his arrest. It is argued that there is neither direct nor indirect evidence to suggest the involvement of the applicant in the commission of suicide by the deceased. The essential ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 108 BNS are absent. It is pointed out that three co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, which is on record as Annexure No. 7 to the bail application.There is no link existing between the act of the accused and the suicide committed by the deceased. 6. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the application, submitting that the FIR as well as the complainant’s statement contain specific allegations against the present applicant. The case of the applicant is distinguished from that of the co-accused, who were enlarged on interim anticipatory bail. Those co-accused were women and were granted bail on the ground that only general allegations had been made against them. However, in the case of the present applicant, a specific role has been assigned. 7. It is further submitted that before his death, the deceased recorded a video in which he categorically held the present applicant responsible. The video also shows that a phone call was made by the deceased to the applicant, which was answered by him. Voice recordings of the deceased, wherein the role of the applicant is reflected, are available. Since the investigation is still in progress, no ground for anticipatory bail is made out. Learned A.G.A. in support of his argument has relied on judgment of Supreme Court in Nikita Jagganath Shetty v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1489 (relevant para 18). 8. Having considered the record, including the complainant’s statement, the voice recordings of both the deceased and the applicant and the postmortem report, which, apart from the ligature mark, reveals no other injuries except a contusion measuring 6 cm x 2.5 cm over the occipital region of the skull, with the cause of death opined as antemortem hanging due to asphyxia, this Court finds merit in the submissions of the prosecution. NABAIL No. 1379 of 2025 2 9. In view of the law laid down in Nikita Jagganath Shetty (supra), the gravity of the offence, the role specifically assigned to the applicant, and the fact that the investigation is ongoing, it cannot be said that it is a case of false implication or accused has been implicated only to tarnish his reputation. Hence, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. 10. Accordingly, the application stands rejected. September 25, 2025 R.C. NABAIL No. 1379 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench