# Kamal Bharbhuja v. State of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2025) 6 ILRA 62
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-06-20
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 2045 of 2025
- **Bench:** Sameer Jain
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/kamal-bharbhuja-v-state-of-u-p-anr-53579
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

Sri Avdhesh Narayan Tiwari, G.A.

Bail -Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention
of
Atrocities)
Act-Criminal
appeal u/s 14-A(2)-initially FIR lodged u/s 103
BNS and other sections against the appellant
and another -with regard to murder of the wife
of the o.p. no.2- but subsequently the case was
converted u/s 108 BNS-abatement to suicide-if
appellant was having illicit relationship with the
deceased -then it cannot be said that due to his
abetment she committed suicide-Bail granted.

Appeal allowed. (E-9)

## Text

62 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Bombay at Goa in the case of Mr. Asif
Khan Pathan (Supra) is concerned, the
same is not applicable on the facts and
circumstances of the present case because
in
the
said
case,
some
additional
information was supplied by the informant
subsequently, on the basis of which, the
N.C.R. was converted into FIR, therefore,
the same is distinguishable in the facts and
circumstances of the present case.

14. This Court in the case of
Shavez and Ors. vs. State of U.P. and Ors.,
MANU/UP/4929/2019
has
held
that
conversion of NCR into FIR during
investigation after finding the fact that
accused person has caused serious injuries
to victim and had thereby committed
cognizable offence, is neither illegal nor
impermissible. It has also been held that
merely the fact that new crime number was
assigned and a Chick FIR was also
executed, does not necessarily adversely
affect the proceedings in any vital manner
nor the applicants can claim that they have
prejudiced by the FIR. It has also been held
that this Court does not deem it proper and
cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial
before the actual trial begins. On a perusal
of FIR and the material collected by the
Investigating Officer on the basis of which
charge sheet has been submitted makes out
a prima facie offence against the accused at
this stage and there appear to be sufficient
ground
for
proceedings
against
the
applicants.

15.
In
view
of
above
and
considering overall facts and circumstances
of this case, this Court does not find any
illegality
or
error
in
the
impugned
proceedings against the applicants which
may call for interference by this Court. The
application has been filed on misconceived
ground and lacks merits.
16. Accordingly, the application is
dismissed.
----------
(2025) 6 ILRA 62
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 20.06.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 2045 of 2025

Kamal Bharbhuja ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri Brajesh Nath Rai, Sri Rahul Mishra

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
Sri Avdhesh Narayan Tiwari, G.A.

Bail -Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention
of
Atrocities)
Act-Criminal
appeal u/s 14-A(2)-initially FIR lodged u/s 103
BNS and other sections against the appellant
and another -with regard to murder of the wife
of the o.p. no.2- but subsequently the case was
converted u/s 108 BNS-abatement to suicide-if
appellant was having illicit relationship with the
deceased -then it cannot be said that due to his
abetment she committed suicide-Bail granted.

Appeal allowed. (E-9)
(Delivered by Hon'ble Sameer Jain, J.)

1. Heard Sri Rahul Mishra, learned
counsel of the appellant, Sri Deepak
Dubey, Advocate holding brief of Avdhesh
Narayan Tiwari, learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 and Sri Ashutosh
Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. This criminal appeal under
Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes &
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
6 All. Kamal Bharbhuja Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
63
Act, has been filed by the appellant
with a prayer to quash the order dated
24.01.2025,
passed
by
the
learned
Additional
District
and
Session
Judge/Special
Judge
(S.C./S.T.
Act),
Mahoba in Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No. 25 of 2025, (Kamal Bharbhuja Vs.
State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime
No. 685 of 2024, under Sections 108, 352,
351(3) of B.N.S. and 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha),
3(2)(5ka), 3(2)(5) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act (as Amended under Act No. 1 of
2015), Kotwali Nagar, District-Mahoba.

3.
Learned
counsel
for
the
appellant submits, however, initially FIR of
the present case was lodged under Section
103 BNS and other sections against the
appellant and another with regard to
murder of the wife of the o.p. no.2 but
subsequently when it was found that
actually deceased committed suicide due to
the abetment of the appellant then case was
converted under Section 108 BNS.

4. He
next
submits,
as
per
prosecution appellant was having illicit
relationship with the deceased and he was
continuously pressurizing her to perform
marriage
with
him,
therefore,
she
committed suicide.

5. He next submits, however, entire
allegation of abetment made against the
appellant is totally false but even if the
same is accepted then also it cannot be said
that due to the abetment of the appellant
deceased committed suicide.

6. He next submits, appellant is not
having any previous criminal history and in
the present matter he is in jail since
01.01.2025.

7. He further submitted, therefore,
the impugned order dated 24.01.2025
passed by the court concerned by which
bail application of the appellant has been
dismissed is illegal and is liable to be set
aside and appellant is entitled to be
enlarged on bail in the present matter.

8. Per contra, learned AGA and
learned counsel for the opposite party no.2
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and
submitted that appellant is responsible for
the death of the deceased and he was not
having only illicit relationship with her but
he also pressurized her to perform marriage
with him and therefore, he does not deserve
bail and there is no illegality in the
impugned order dated 24.01.2025 passed
by the court concerned and therefore
instant appeal filed by the appellant is
devoid of merit and is liable to be
dismissed.

9. I have heard both the parties and
perused the record of the case.

10. From the record it reflects FIR
of the present case was initially lodged
under Section 103 BNS along with other
sections against the appellant with the
allegation that he committed the murder of
the wife of the o.p. no.2 but subsequently
during investigation when it was revealed
that appellant was having illicit relationship
with the deceased and he was continuously
pressurizing her to perform marriage with
him and therefore she committed suicide
then case was converted under Section 108
BNS.

11. This court finds merit in the
arguments advanced by learned counsel for
the appellant that even if appellant was
having illicit relationship with the deceased
64 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
then also it cannot be said that due to his
abetment she committed suicide.

12. Further, appellant is not having
any previous criminal history and in the
present
matter
he
is
in
jail
since
01.01.2025.

13. Therefore, considering the facts
and circumstances of the case, discussed
above, in my view, impugned order dated
24.01.2025 by which bail application of the
appellant has been dismissed by the court
concerned is illegal and is liable to be set
aside and appellant is entitled to be released
on bail in the instant matter.

14. Accordingly, the instant appeal
stands allowed and the impugned order
dated 24.01.2025 passed by the court
concerned is hereby set aside and without
expressing any opinion on the merit of the
case, appellant is directed to be enlarged on
bail in the instant matter.

15.
Let
appellant
Kamal
Bharbhuja be released on bail in the
aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal
bond and two reliable sureties in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the court
concerned with the following conditions:

 (i) The appellant will not tamper
with the evidence during the trial.

 (ii)
The
appellant
will
not
pressurize/
intimidate
the
prosecution
witness.

 (iii) The appellant will appear
before the trial court on the date fixed,
unless personal presence is exempted.

 (iv) The appellant shall not
commit an offence similar to the offence of
which he is accused, or suspected, of the
commission of which he is suspected.

(v) The appellant shall not directly
or indirectly make any inducement, threat
or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case so as to dissuade him
from disclosing such facts to the Court or
to any police officer or tamper with the
evidence.

16. In case of breach of any of the
above conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move bail cancellation
application before this Court.
----------
(2025) 6 ILRA 64
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 19.06.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

Criminal Appeal No. 2275 of 2025

Anshu Kushwaha ...Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri
Abhishek
Kumar
Saroj,
Nagendra
Bahadur Singh

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
G.A., Sitaram Patel

Criminal
Law
-
Bharatiya
Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 180 &
183 - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
- Sections - 3(2)(V) & 14-A(2) - Bhartiya
Nyay Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 69, 89,
115(2), 333, 352, 351(2) & 351(3) -
Criminal Appeal - filed u/s 14-A(2) of SC/ST Act,
- for quashing the impugned order - whereby
court below rejected Bail Application - FIR -
offence of rape and prepared obscene video -