SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 2026:UHC:1997 BA1 No. 39 of 2026 Jyoti ....Applicant Vs. State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent Hon ’ble Ash ish Nait han i, J. Mr. Mukesh Kapruwan and Mr. Shubhr Rastogi, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant– Jyoti, D/o Rajpal, W/o Late Adarsh, R/o Shanti Nagar, Rani Pokhri, P.S. Rani Pokhri, District Dehradun. The Applicant is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime No. 85 of 2025, registered at Police Station Rani Pokhri, District Dehradun, for the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the “BNS”). 4. Heard Mr. Mukesh Kaparuwan and Mr. Shubhr Rastogi, learned counsel for the Applicant, and Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. Perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is languishing in jail since 18.10.2025. It is further submitted that there was no instigation or abetment to commit suicide, nor any mens rea to drive the deceased to commit suicide. It is contended that the Applicant and the deceased were living happily and enjoying their married life. The Applicant is a young girl of about 19 years, who had left her parental home for the deceased, and therefore had no reason or intention to abet the commission of suicide of her husband. 6. On the other hand, learned Brief Holder for the State opposed the Bail Application, contending that during the course of investigation, the mobile phone of the deceased was recovered from the possession of the present Applicant. Upon examination of the said mobile phone, a two-page suicide note sent by the deceased prior to his death to his relative, namely Mahesh Chandra Kala, was discovered. It is further submitted that during investigation it came to light that the present Applicant had deleted the said suicide note from the WhatsApp of the deceased and had also removed the suicide note from the place of occurrence. Accordingly, during the course of investigation, Section 238 of the BNS was added. 7. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the manner in which the offence has been committed, the role attributed to the Applicant, and the fact that the trial is in progress, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the Applicant at this stage. 8. Accordingly, the Bail Application is rejected. 9. However, it is clarified that the observations made herein are only for the purpose of deciding the present Bail Application and shall not affect the merits of the case during trial. 10. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. ( Ash ish Nait h an i, J.) 20.03.2026 Shiksha