Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38354 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8939 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Jyoti Gautam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gagan Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned Advocate filed his power on behalf of the informant, today in the Court, which is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Gagan Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 369 of 2024, under Section 108 B.N.S., Police Station Trance Yamuna, District Agra during pendency of the trial. 4. FIR of the present case was lodged on 16.09.2024 against applicant and her family members under Section 108 B.N.S. and according to the FIR marriage of the applicant was solemnized with the brother of the informant on 01.08.2014 and after marriage applicant and her family members tortured him and in this regard on 26.07.2024 he also moved an application against them and due to their torture, he committed suicide on 14.09.2024. 5. It is further mentioned in the FIR that before his death brother of the informant also posted his video on the social media. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, applicant is wife of the deceased and on the basis of false allegation of abetment she has been made accused in the present matter along with her family members. 7. He further submits, actually matrimonial dispute was pending between husband and wife and in the month of July, 2024 applicant filed an application for maintenance against the deceased under Section 144 B.N.S.S. and this fact is evident from page-67 of the paper-book and only due to the matrimonial dispute deceased i.e. husband of the applicant committed suicide. 8. He further submits, however, there is video of the deceased on record which shows, in the video deceased stated that applicant is responsible for his death but merely on the basis of such video at this stage, it cannot be said that due to the abetment of the applicant, deceased committed suicide. He further submits, it appears, only due to matrimonial dispute arose between husband and wife he committed suicide. 9. He further submits, applicant is a lady and she is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 18.01.2025. 10. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted, applicant is wife of the deceased and she along with her family members used to torture him and only due to their torture deceased committed suicide and this fact is even evident from his video in which he categorically stated that applicant is responsible for his death but both the counsels could not dispute the fact that some matrimonial dispute was pending between both the parties and applicant in the month of July, 2024 also filed an application for maintenance against the deceased. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, as per allegation, applicant, who was wife of the deceased tortured him and due to torture of applicant and her family members, deceased committed suicide and there is also a video of the deceased which suggests that in the video he blamed the applicant for his death but record also suggests that matrimonial dispute was pending between applicant and deceased and applicant in the month of July, 2024 filed an application under Section 144 B.N.S.S. against him for maintenance. Further, even from the video it could not be reflected that due to the abetment of the applicant deceased committed suicide. 13. This Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that if due to the matrimonial dispute arose between husband and wife either husband or wife is committed suicide then it cannot be said that due to abetement he/she committed suicide. 14. Further, applicant is a lady and she is not having any criminal history and in the present matter she is in jail since 18.01.2025. 15. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed for punitive purpose. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant - Smt. Jyoti Gautam be released on bail in the aforesaid case on 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 appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 19. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 20. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad