Allahabad High Court
KHUSHBOOversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The applicant is entitled to bail as the prosecution failed to establish the essential ingredients of abetment to suicide and there is no apprehension of tampering or intimidation.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Khushboo, the wife of a deceased man alleged to have committed suicide, under Section 108 of the B.N.S. The applicant argued she was falsely implicated and that the post‑mortem showed death by ante‑mortem hanging, with no evidence of her instigating or aiding the suicide. The State opposed bail but could not refute the claim that the essential ingredients of abetment were absent. The Court, after reviewing the FIR, video evidence, and post‑mortem report, found no direct act of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid by the applicant and noted no risk of evidence tampering or witness intimidation. Consequently, the Court granted bail subject to personal bond and sureties with standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant can be held liable for abetment of suicide under Section 108 B.N.S.
- Whether the material on record establishes the essential ingredients of the offence of abetment to suicide
- Whether bail should be granted considering the pendency of trial and risk of tampering or intimidation
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 108
Subjects
- bail
- abetment of suicide
- Section 108
- false implication
- post‑mortem report
- trial pendency
- evidence tampering
- witness intimidation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34798 of 2026
Khushboo
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jitendra Kumar, Keshav Hari Dixit,
Purushottam Dixit
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P. Tripathi, 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. 194 of 2026, under Section 108 B.N.S.,
Police Station Friends Colony, District Etawah 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. According
to 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 video recording 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 harassment
or hurling abuses, as evident from the alleged video recording, in absence of
any positive act of instigation, intentional aid, compelling the deceased to
commit suicide, would not constitute the offence of abetment to 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-
BAIL No. 34798 of 2026
2
sheet has been submitted. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The
applicant is in jail since 29.07.2026 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 according to the postmortem report,
the cause of death is asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging. As per the
allegations in the first information report, the alleged video recording 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 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
almost two 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- Khushboo, 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.
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
SKT/-
(Vivek Varma,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHIVA KANT TIWARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…