Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74940 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14570 of 2025 Applicant :- Direndra Saxena Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA, for the State, apprised the Court that on 24.4.2025 notice has been served to the informant of the case. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA, for the State. 3. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 352 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 108 and 61 (2) BNS and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act and Section 11/12 POCSO Act, Police Station Sungarhi, District Pilibhit during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially FIR of the present case was lodged under Section 137(2) BNS but after recovery of dead body of the daughter of the informant, case was converted under Section 108 BNS, 5. He further submits that nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation when the statement of the sister of the deceased was recorded then applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 6. He further submits that as per the statement of the sister of the deceased, applicant and deceased were having love affair but applicant in spite of promise did not perform marriage with her, therefore, she committed suicide but entire allegation levelled against the applicant is totally false. 7. He further submits that actually however, applicant and deceased were having love affair but informant side was not in favour of their relationship and informant continuously pressurized the deceased to break all the relationship with the applicant and only due to this reason deceased left her paternal home and committed suicide. 8. He further submits that even there is no cogent evidence of abetment against the applicant on record. 9 He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 16.10.2024, i.e., for the last more more than six months. 10. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that from the statement of the sister of the deceased it is apparent that applicant and deceased were having love affair but applicant subsequently in spite of promise did not perform marriage with her, therefore, she committed suicide and, therefore, at this stage it cannot be said that there is no evidence of abetment against the applicant. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, in the present matter applicant has also challaned for offences under the provisions of SC/ST Act but there is no allegation that as deceased belonged to the community of Scheduled Castes, therefore, applicant committed the alleged crime, therefore, prima facie offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is not made out against the applicant. 13. Further, as per prosecution applicant and deceased were having love affair and when applicant did not perform marriage with her then deceased committed suicide but considering the over all facts and circumstances of the case, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant with regard to alleged committed suicide by the deceased, cannot be ruled out at this stage. 14. Further, this Court also finds merit on the submission of the learned counsel for the applicant that even after perusal of the entire material available on record, prima facie it cannot be said that due to the abetment of the applicant deceased committed suicide. 15. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 16.10.2024, i.e., for the last more than six months. 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-Direndra Saxena 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 :- 8.5.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad