'Illicit Affair Not Abetment': Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Woman’s Suicide Case

The Allahabad High Court recently granted bail to a man accused of abetting the suicide of a Dalit woman, observing that merely being in an illicit relationship does not automatically amount to abetment under law.

The bench of Justice Sameer Jain allowed the criminal appeal filed by one Kamal Bharbhuja under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, challenging the rejection of his bail plea by the Mahoba Special Court in January 2025.

The FIR in the case was initially registered under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and other provisions, alleging that Bharbhuja had murdered the wife of the informant. However, during investigation, police concluded that the deceased had died by suicide and that Bharbhuja had allegedly abetted it by pressuring her to marry him despite already being in an illicit relationship with her. Consequently, the charge was modified to Section 108 of the BNS (abetment of suicide), along with relevant sections of the SC/ST Act.

Appearing for the appellant, Advocate Rahul Mishra argued that even if the prosecution’s version were to be accepted as true, the allegations did not legally sustain the charge of abetment. He pointed out that the deceased’s decision to end her life could not be directly attributed to the alleged pressure by the appellant, and that no material existed to show instigation or active involvement required to attract Section 108.

The counsel further submitted that Bharbhuja had no prior criminal history and had been in custody since January 1, 2025.

Opposing the bail, the Additional Government Advocate and the counsel for the complainant submitted that the appellant had maintained an illicit relationship with the deceased and had continuously pressurised her for marriage, which led her to take the extreme step. They argued that such conduct justified denial of bail under the special law protecting Dalits.

However, the high court found merit in the appellant’s arguments. “Even if the appellant was having an illicit relationship with the deceased, it cannot be said that due to his abetment she committed suicide,” the order stated. The judge further held that the trial court’s decision to reject the bail application was illegal.

Setting aside the January 24, 2025 order of the Mahoba court, the high court directed that the appellant be released on bail, subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.

As part of the bail conditions, court ordered the appellant not to tamper with evidence, not to intimidate witnesses, to appear regularly before the trial court, and to avoid committing any similar offence during the pendency of the trial.

Case Title: Kamal Bharbhuja vs. State of U.P. and Another
Download order here