HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31455 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and Mr. Ansar Ahmad, learned counsel for the informant. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 50 of 2025, under Sections 108, 115(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Basrehar, District Etawah during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is co-brother (Sarhu) of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to the post-mortem report, no external injury was found on the body of the deceased. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death could not be ascertained. Hence, viscera was preserved and sent for chemical analysis. It is contended that the viscera report is still awaited. It is next contended that as per the allegations in the first information report and the material collected during the course of investigation, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out. The applicant, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Mahendra Awase v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2025, dated 17.01.2025, and Laxmi Das v. The State of West Bengal and others, Criminal Appeal No. 706 of 2017, dated 21.01.2025. Investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been submitted. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 20.08.2025 and if he is released on Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ansar Ahmad, G.A. Hariom .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that according to the post-mortem report, no external injury was found on the body of the deceased, in the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death could not be ascertained hence, viscera was sent for chemical analysis; and, as per the allegations in the first information report and the material collected during the course of investigation, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than one and half month and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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 delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, 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- Hariom, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 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 13, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 31455 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad