Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3494 (ALL)

SAVITA v. STATE OF U.P.

BAIL/15240/2026 · 2026-05-05

Vivek Varma

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15240 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Copy of postmortem report as well as viscera report of the deceased produced by learned AGA, is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondent. 3. The present bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 248 of 2025, under Section 108 BNS, Police Station Charwa, District Kaushambi during the pendency of trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the wife of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 20.06.2025, whereas the first information report was lodged on 15.12.2025. The inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. As per the postmortem report, the cause of death is uncertain. Viscera was preserved and sent for chemical analysis. As per the viscera report organochloro insecticide poison was present. Further, as per the allegations in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, the necessary ingredients to constitute the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mayank Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Savita .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out. The applicant, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. Merely, on the allegation of harassment, the applicant has been implicated. The prosecution case, as it stands, does not disclose the mens rea or proximate act required to attract the provision. In support of his submission, counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Nipun Aneja and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 2017) decided on 03.10.2024 and Abhinav Mohan Delkar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others (Criminal Appeal Nos. 2177-2185 of 2024) decided on 18.08.2025. The applicant is in jail since 23.03.2026 having no criminal history and in case she is enlarged on bail, she will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the first information report was lodged belatedly. As per the allegations in the first information report and the material collected during investigation, the necessary 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. The applicant is a lady and has no criminal antecedents. Further, 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, more so when 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, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant Savita, involved in the aforesaid case be BAIL No. 15240 of 2026 2 released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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. May 6, 2026 Lbm/- BAIL No. 15240 of 2026 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad