HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30102 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 147 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 351(1), 108, 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Amapur, District- Kasganj during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the postmortem report the cause of death is asphexia as a result of antemortem hanging. As per 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 against the applicants. The applicants, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Mahendra Awase vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 221 of 2025) decided on 17.01.2025 and Laxmi Das vs. The State of West Bengal and Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 706 of 2017) decided on 21.01.2025. Further, identically placed co-accused Pawan Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 21.8.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23654 of 2025. The applicants claim parity. Investigation has been completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. The criminal history of the applicants has been explained in para 26 of the bail application. The applicants are in jail since 14.5.2025. In case they are enlarged on bail, they will not misuse the said liberty. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arjun Singh Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rahul Chauhan And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. 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 against the applicants. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicants with the offence. Identically placed co-accused Pawan Kumar has been granted bail by this Court. Further the applicants have presently remained confined for more than four months and 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 applicants, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicants, Rahul Chauhan @ Gaurav and Akash involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 7. 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 8, 2025 S.S. BAIL No. 30102 of 2025 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad