HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30542 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. 295 of 2026, under Sections 108, 352, 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Baradari, District Bareilly during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned 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 05.01.2026, whereas the application under Section 173(4) B.N.S.S. was filed on 09.02.2026. The first information report was lodged on 11.03.2026. Inordinate delay in filing the application for registration of the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. According to the postmortem report, the cause of death could not be ascertained. Viscera was preserved and sent for chemical analysis. As per the viscera report, aluminum phosphide poison was found. Further, as per the allegations in the first information report, the statement of the witnesses namely Kamal Kumar, Mukesh Kashyap, Mahendra Singh and Naresh Chandra Gupta 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. The applicant, in no manner, abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. Mere allegation of matrimonial discord between the applicant and the deceased in absence of any positive act of instigation, intentional aid, or proximate conduct compelling the deceased to commit suicide, do not constitute the offence of abetment to Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kumar Singh, Syed Wajid Ali Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sapna Gupta .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) suicide. 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 19.07.2026 and if she is released on bail, she 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 the application for registration of the first information report has been lodged belatedly. As per the allegations in the first information report, the statement of the witnesses namely Kamal Kumar, Mukesh Kashyap, Mahendra Singh and Naresh Chandra Gupta 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 is a lady and has remained confined for more than one and half 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. Let the applicant- Sapna Gupta, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that she: (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. BAIL No. 30542 of 2026 2 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. September 8, 2026 SKT/- BAIL No. 30542 of 2026 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad