Allahabad High Court

RAVENDRA @ RAVIversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 28 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The applicant is entitled to bail as the prosecution has not established the essential ingredients of abetment of suicide and no reasonable apprehension of tampering or intimidation exists.

Summary

The applicant, Ravendra, husband of a woman who allegedly committed suicide, was arrested under Sections 85, 108 and 61(2) of the B.N.S. for alleged abetment of suicide. He contended that the FIR was lodged five days after the death, that the investigation showed no suicide note or material establishing abetment, and that the delay and alteration of charges weakened the prosecution case. The State opposed bail but could not rebut the applicant's claim that no proximate act of instigation existed. The court, after examining the record, held that the essential ingredients of Section 108 were not made out and that there was no risk of evidence tampering or witness intimidation. Consequently, the court granted bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the facts alleged in the FIR satisfy the essential ingredients of Section 108 IPC for abetment of suicide.
Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, or delaying the trial.
Whether bail should be granted in view of the delay in filing the FIR and the amendment of charges.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 61(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 108, 85

Subjects

bail
abetment of suicide
Section 108 IPC
delay in FIR
false implication
prima facie
trial postponement
sureties

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25566 of 2026

Ravendra @ Ravi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mahipal Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Sushil Kumar Chaturvedi

Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard Sri Amit Daga, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Mahipal
Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A.
for the State-opposite party, and Sri Sushil Kumar Chaturvedi, learned
counsel for the informant.

2. The present bail application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the
applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 225 of 2026, under Sections 85, 108,
61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Sadabad, District Hathras during the pendency
of the trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the
husband of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the present case.
The applicant was married to the deceased about 24 years ago. The incident
is alleged to have occurred on 02.06.2026, whereas the first information
report was lodged on 07.06.2026 under Sections 85, 103(1), 61(2) B.N.S.
Inordinate delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the
prosecution case. During investigation, Section 103(1) B.N.S. was deleted
and Section 108 B.N.S. was added. As per the postmortem report, the cause
of death is asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. Further, as per the
allegations in the first information report, the alleged suicide note 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 allegations of extending threats or harassment in absence of
any positive act of instigation or intentional aid compelling the deceased to
commit suicide, do not constitute the offence of abetment to suicide. In
BAIL No. 25566 of 2026
2

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. Criminal history of the applicant has been
explained in Paragraph-3 of the first supplementary affidavit. The applicant
is in jail since 07.06.2026 and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the
said liberty.

4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have 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 allegations in the first
information report, the alleged suicide note 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 three months 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- Ravendra @ Ravi, 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,

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
BAIL No. 25566 of 2026
3

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 29, 2026
SKT/- (Vivek Varma,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
SHIVA KANT TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…