Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:958 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13360 of 2024 Applicant :- Nanhu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Sri Sumit Chauhan, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant/ complainant. Said Vakalatnama is taken on record. 2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 30.09.2024 in Case Crime No.397 of 2024, under Section 108 of B.N.S., Police Station - Laharpur, District - Sitapur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant, who is co-brother (Sadu) of the deceased, has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein for the alleged incident dated 06.09.2024, the F.I.R. has been lodged on 08.09.2024 implicating the entire family of the wife of the deceased and her relatives. As per the prosecution story, there was some dispute between the deceased and his wife, therefore, she was residing in her maternal house. The deceased had filed one application u/s 9 of Hindu Marriage Act and was trying to get his wife back. On the fateful day, the deceased went to the house of his in-laws to get his wife back to his house but his wife did not agree to go with him. Learned counsel has submitted that the impugned FIR is an outcome of the afterthought as the present applicant may not be instrumental in any manner whatsoever to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. There is no overt act on the part of the applicant though there was some trivial dispute between the deceased and his wife on account of that his wife was living in her maternal place alongwith her two and half years' daughter. The applicant is absolutely unaware as to why the deceased committed suicide. Learned counsel has further submitted that for constituting the offence under Section 108 of B.N.S., there must be positive/ overt act on the part of the accused-applicant instigating/ abetting the deceased to commit suicide and in the present case, such ingredients are missing, though the aforesaid aspect may be ascertained/ tested during the course of the trial. The applicant has no prior criminal history. Charge-sheet has been filed in this case. 4. Further submission is that co-accused persons, namely, Anita (wife of the deceased) and Hareram (brother-in-law of the deceased) have been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 03.12.2024 and 20.12.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Applications No.12538 of 2024 and 13194 of 2024 respectively, therefore, on the basis of principles of parity, the present applicant may also be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel undertakes on behalf of the applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and shall abide by all terms and conditions of bail order, if granted by this Court. 5. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant. 6. Without entering into the merits of the case; considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties; contents and allegations of the F.I.R.; the fact that there is two days' unexplained delay in lodging the FIR; the entire family of the wife of the deceased and her relatives have been implicated; it appears that there was no positive / overt act on the part of the accused-applicant instigating / abetting the deceased to commit suicide; the applicant has no prior criminal history; co-accused Anita (wife of the deceased) and Hareram (brother-in-law of the deceased) have been granted bail by this Court and undertaking of the applicant that he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant- Nanhu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 208 of the B.N.S., 2023. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 7.1.2025 RBS/- Digitally signed by :- RAM BIR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench