HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35495 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Sri Ankit Tiwari, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant. The same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ankit Tiwari, counsel for the informant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The present bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 139 of 2025, under Section 108 BNS, Police Station Saroorpur, District Meerut during the pendency of trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the wife of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to the postmortem report, no external injury was seen over the body at the time of examination. In the opinion of the doctor the cause of death could not be ascertained. Viscera was preserved and sent for chemical analysis. As per the FSL report, aluminum phosphide (poison) was found. Further, as per the allegations in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Laxami Pati, Pavan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sahiba .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) out. 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 Nipun Aneja and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 2017) decided on 03.10.2024 and Abhinav Mohan Delkar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others (Criminal Appeal Nos. 2177-2185 of 2024) decided on 18.08.2025. It is next contended that co-accused Najim has been granted bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 29878 of 2025. The applicant is a lady and is in jail since 18.08.2025 having no criminal history and in case she is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned AGA and the counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the necessary ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out. The co-accused Najim has been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has remained confined for almost two months and after submission of the charge-sheet 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 delay the trial 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. 7. Let the applicant Sahiba, 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 the court concerned subject to the conditions that she: BAIL No. 35495 of 2025 2 (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. 8. 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 14, 2025 Lbm/- BAIL No. 35495 of 2025 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad