HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1026 of 2025 Court No. - 27 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application is filed by the applicant involved in Case Crime No.203 of 2025, under Sections 108 BNS, Police Station - Majhila, District - Hardoi. 3. On 14.8.2025, following order was passed :- The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No: 203/2025, Under Section 108 B.N.S., Police Station: Majhila, District: Hardoi. Heard learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Avnish Kumar Tiwari, learned Advocate who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 26.05.2025, the deceased, Raj Bahadur, had gone to parental home of his wife to bring her back. There, an altercation took place between him, his wife, his father-in-law, and the present applicant. It is further alleged that owing to the threats extended by them, Raj Bahadur committed suicide at his matrimonial home. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations are baseless and there is no independent witness to support the prosecution version. It is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Abhinav Singh, Avnish Kumar Tiwari Ajit .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prn. Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) argued that except the hearsay statements made by the inquest witnesses, no material has been brought on record to connect the applicant with the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the deceased did not die at the applicant?s residence but at his own matrimonial home, and the prosecution has failed to produce any evidence linking the applicant either to the matrimonial home of the deceased or to the place of occurrence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been falsely implicated. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that if the accused is granted anticipatory bail, he undertakes to comply with all conditions imposed by the Court. He shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty granted to him. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application, submitting that the offence is serious in nature and the investigation is still in progress. It is argued that if the applicant is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he may not cooperate in the investigation. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Steps be taken within a week. Learned Addl. Government Advocate is allowed 15 days' time to file counter affidavit. List on 06.10.2025. Upon due consideration of the material available on record, particularly the postmortem report, it appears that the cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. No other injuries were found on the body of the deceased. It is further evident that the FIR was lodged after a delay of 23 days, and no satisfactory explanation for such delay has been provided. At this stage, prima facie, there appears to be no material collected by the Investigating Officer to substantiate the allegation that the wife of the deceased had earlier eloped with the applicant. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, as well as the undertaking furnished by the applicant to cooperate in the investigation, and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon?ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, this Court finds it to be a fit case to grant interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the NABAIL No. 1026 of 2025 2 arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned. The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within seven days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. He shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the basis of presumption. He further submits that the applicant never misused the liberty of interim bail and is ready to cooperate in the trial. In such circumstances, applicant is entitled for protection of this Court under the provisions of anticipatory bail and the present bail application may be allowed. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant oppose the prayer of the applicant and submits that applicant is ex-boyfriend of the main accused and due to their relation, deceased committed suicide but they do not dispute the fact that the applicant never misused the liberty of interim bail. 6. Considering the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the F.I.R., bail application as well as earlier order passed by this Court dated 14.8.2025, it is evident that applicant was on interim bail during the course of investigation and she never misused the liberty of the same, accordingly, the present application for anticipatory bail is allowed in terms of order dated 14.8.2025. October 6, 2025 GauraV/- NABAIL No. 1026 of 2025 3 (Rajeev Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench