SAGAR VISHVKARMA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant application filed on behalf of applicant Sagar Vishvkarma under Sec. 482 of B.N.S.S seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 35 of 2025, under Ss. 108, 351 (2) of B.N.S., 2023, Police Station Sakaldeeha, District Chandauli.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged in the first information report. It is further submitted that applicant as well as deceased was in love and applicant wanted to marry her. It has been falsely alleged that applicant has threatened the deceased that if she will not marry with him then he will not permit or allow her to marry with any other person. It is also submitted that it is false allegation that he has ever threatened the victim/deceased that she will face dire consequences if she will try to marry with any other person. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant submitted that on the basis of some whatsapp chat between the applicant and the victim as well as some photographs in the mobile of the applicant, the police has connected the applicant in the instant commission of crime for the offence punishable under Ss. 108, 351 (2) of B.N.S. It is vehemently submitted that deceased/victim's mobile phone was taken by her father, therefore, he was not able to contact with the deceased. It is also wrong to say that he has made any call to the victim/deceased just prior to the incident. He further added in the arguments that it is a case of honor killing as parent of the victim/deceased did not want to marry her daughter or sister to the applicant. It is also submitted that the brother of the deceased has given knife blow to the victim/deceased as he was not happy with the deceased as she wanted to marry with the applicant. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, applicant has not committed any offence punishable under Sec. 108, 351 (2) of B.N.S. as no ingredients satisfied for commission of the offence as alleged in the first information report. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant further undertakes that he will co-operate with the investigating agency and he shall abide by all terms and conditions imposed by the Court while granting anticipatory bail. He prayed that applicant may be released on bail at the event of arrest as no case is made out against him.

(3.) Per contra, leaned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State vehemently opposed the instant application and submitted that applicant is charged for the offence punishable under Sec. 108, 351 (2) of B.N.S. which is serious in nature. It is also submitted that applicant had called the victim/deceased just prior to the incident and the duration of the said call was 26 Minutes and 47 Seconds. He vehemently submitted that such long time of conversation with the victim/deceased instigated her to commit suicide. He vehemently opposed the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant was not able to contact the deceased as her mobile was taken by her father and due to non-availability of mobile, he could not make contact with the deceased. It is also wrong to say that victim was never threatened by the applicant as alleged in the F.I.R. Learned A.G.A. has placed the case diary before Court during arguments. He has also referred the C.D.R. which is annexed with case diary and submitted that after perusal of the C.D.R. and pen drive which has already been saved by the investigating agency clearly established that he has instigated the victim to commit suicide. Relying upon the case diary, he further submitted that applicant is not co-operating with the Investigating Agency and he is required for the custodial interrogation. Learned A.G.A. submitted that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant application is devoid of merits and applicant is not entitled for any relief as prayed in the application.