HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26198 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party, and Sri Prabha Shankar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant. 3. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 205 of 2025, under Sections 108, 3(5) B.N.S.S., Police Station Saini, District Kaushambi during the pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. According to the post-mortem report, no external injury was seen on the body of the deceased, 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 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashish Kumar Tiwari, Ayush Mishra, G.A., Pavan Kumar, Prabha Shanker Mishra Vipin Pal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 2017, dated 21.01.2025. Investigation has been completed and the charge- sheet has been submitted. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in Paragraph-20 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 04.06.2025 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. 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. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the post-mortem report, no external injury was seen on the body of the deceased and the cause of death could not be ascertained; the viscera was sent for chemical analysis and as per the FSL report, aluminum phosphide poison was found; 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 almost four months 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. 7. 7. Let the applicant- Vipin Pal, 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. 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 9, 2025 SKT/- BAIL No. 26198 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad