HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15986 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party. 2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 348 of 2023, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Crossing Republic, District Ghaziabad during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Initially, the first information report was lodged under Section 376D I.P.C. The applicant was granted bail by the Special Judge (EC Act)/ Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad vide order dated 06.01.2024 passed in Bail Application No. 7482 of 2023. During the course of investigation, the case was converted into Section 306 I.P.C. As per the postmortem report, the cause of death could not be ascertained and the viscera was preserved. As per the viscera report, organochloro insecticide poison was found. Further, as per the statement of aunt of the deceased namely Premila Devi, when the deceased was brought to the hospital, she was in a critical condition. In broken words and gesture, the deceased indicated that the applicant had done wrong to her and that he should not be forgiven. Another witness, namely, Shalu, who was also working with the deceased, stated that the deceased had informed her that the applicant had done wrong to her. It is contended that taking into account the said statement and the other material collected during the course of investigation, the essential ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. are not made out. The applicant, in no manner, abetted the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ajay Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) commission of suicide by the deceased. The prosecution case, as it stands, does not disclose the mens rea or proximate act required to attract the said provision. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgement of the Apex Court in the cases of Nipun Aneja and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 2017, decided on 03.10.2024, and Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. The State of Maharashtra and others, Criminal Appeal Nos. 2177-2185 of 2024, decided on 18.08.2025. Investigation has been completed and the charge- sheet has been submitted. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 26.03.2026 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 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 learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that as per the viscera report, organochloro insecticide poison was found. As per the statements of the witnesses Pramila Devi and Shalu and the material collected during the course of investigation, the essential ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out. There is no proximate or direct act attributable to the applicant that could be construed as instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid to the commission of suicide. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for more than one month 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. 6. 6. Let the applicant- Ajay Singh, 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, BAIL No. 15986 of 2026 2 (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 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. May 12, 2026 SKT/- BAIL No. 15986 of 2026 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad