Allahabad High Court

ATUL YADAVversusSTATE OF U.P.

Decided: 22 September 2026
Bench: VIVEK VARMA

Holding

The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail as the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 108 B.N.S. are not established and there is no risk of tampering or intimidation.

Summary

The High Court considered a bail application filed by Atul Yadav, husband of a deceased woman, who was charged under Section 108 of the B.N.S. Act for alleged abetment of suicide. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged five days after the alleged incident, that the post‑mortem showed death due to organophosphorus poisoning, and that there was no direct act of instigation or aid by him. The court noted the belated FIR, the lack of material establishing the essential ingredients of the offence, and the applicant’s clean record and prolonged pre‑trial detention. It found no reasonable apprehension that the applicant would tamper with evidence, delay the trial, or intimidate witnesses. Consequently, the court ordered that the applicant be released on bail subject to standard conditions.

Issues considered

Whether the delay in lodging the FIR defeats the prosecution’s case under Section 108 B.N.S.
Whether the applicant’s alleged harassment constitutes abetment of suicide under Section 108 B.N.S.
Whether bail should be granted given the risk of evidence tampering, trial delay, or witness intimidation

Legislation cited

B.N.S. Act — s. 108, 352, 80, 85
D.P. Act — s. 3, 4

Subjects

bail
abetment of suicide
Section 108 B.N.S.
delay in FIR
post‑mortem report
toxicology
criminal procedure

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4622 of 2026

Atul Yadav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pawan Kumar Patel, Anubhav Kumar
Vimal, Km. Surabhi, Pawan Yadav, Ray
Sahab Yadav, Shashank Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Satish Kumar Yadav

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

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nagendra Kumar Mishra,
learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party, and Sri Satish Kumar
Yadav, 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. 180 of 2025, under Section 108 B.N.S.,
Police Station Auncha, District Mainpuri 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 incident is alleged to have occurred on 14.07.2025, whereas the first
information report was lodged on 19.07.2025 under Sections 85, 80(2), 352
B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act. Inordinate delay in lodging the first information
report is fatal to the prosecution case. During investigation, the aforesaid
sections were deleted and the case was converted under Section 108 B.N.S.
According to the postmortem report, the cause of death could not be
ascertained. Viscera was preserved for toxicological and chemical
examination. As per the viscera report, organophosphorus insecticide poison
was found. Further, as per the allegations in the first information report, the
alleged call recordings between the applicant and the deceased 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 in absence of any positive act of
BAIL No. 4622 of 2026
2

instigation or intentional aid on the part of the applicant 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-sheet has been submitted. The applicant has
no criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 11.08.2025 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 the first information report has been
lodged belatedly. As per the allegations in the first information report,
alleged call recordings between the applicant and the deceased 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 has remained confined for more than one
year and a 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- Atul Yadav, 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,
BAIL No. 4622 of 2026
3

(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 23, 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…