Allahabad High Court

NARENDRA @ BABLUversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 29 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The Court held that the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not made out against the applicant, and therefore he is entitled to bail.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Narendra @ Bablu, who was arrested in a case under Section 108 of the B.N.S. for alleged abetment to suicide following the death of his wife by antemortem hanging. The applicant argued that the post‑mortem report and the FIR did not establish any act of instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid on his part, and cited Supreme Court precedents on bail in abetment‑to‑suicide cases. The State and the informant opposed bail but could not demonstrate that the essential ingredients of the offence were satisfied or that the applicant might tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses. The Court found that the prosecution had not proved the requisite elements, noted the applicant’s clean record and the prolonged pre‑trial detention, and therefore held that bail was appropriate. Consequently, the Court ordered the applicant’s release on bail subject to personal bond, sureties and conditions against evidence tampering, witness pressure, and non‑appearance.

Issues considered

Whether the facts alleged in the FIR and the post‑mortem report satisfy the essential ingredients of Section 108 B.N.S. (abetment to suicide).
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail pending trial given the absence of criminal antecedents and lack of risk of evidence tampering or witness intimidation.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 108

Subjects

bail
abetment to suicide
Section 108
post‑mortem report
no criminal antecedents
evidence tampering
witness intimidation

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32947 of 2026

Narendra @ Bablu
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hiralal
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashish Gupta, G.A.

Court No. - 64

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma,
learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Dilip Kumar, Advocate
holding brief of Sri Ashish Gupta, counsel for the informant.
Perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to
enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 321 of 2026,
under Section 108 B.N.S., Police Station- Surajpur, District-
Gautambuddh Nagar during pendency of the trial.

3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the
husband of the deceased has been falsely implicated in the
present case. As per the postmortem report, cause of death is
asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging. Further, as per the
allegations in the first information report and the material
collected during the course of the investigation, the essential
ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 108 B.N.S.,
are not made out against the applicant. Mere allegations of
assault, matrimonial discord or harassment, 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 suicide. In support of his submission,
BAIL No. 32947 of 2026
2

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 other (Criminal Appeal Nos.
2177-2185 of 2024) decided on 18.8.2025. The applicant is in jail
since 16.6.2026 having no criminal history. Investigation has
been completed and charge-sheet has been filed. In case he is
enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

4. Learned A.G.A. for the State and counsel for the informant
have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily
dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the
record, this Court prima facie finds that the as per the postmortem
report, cause of death is asphyxia as a result of antemortem
hanging. Further, as per the allegations in the first information
report and the material collected during the course of the
investigation, the essential ingredients to constitute the offence
under Section 108 B.N.S., are not made out against the applicant.
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 has no criminal
antecedents. The applicant has presently remained confined for
more than three months and 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 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.

6. Let the applicant, Narendra @ Bablu involved in the
aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal
bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction
of court concerned on the following conditions that:
BAIL No. 32947 of 2026
3

i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the
trial court.

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 30, 2026
S.S.

(Vivek Varma,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…