Bail granted where DNA evidence fails to corroborate sexual assault and abetment of suicide is not prima facie established.

The applicant filed a third bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking regular bail

The applicant was arrested on February 26, 2025, in connection with the suicide of a 14-year-old girl (the victim)

The prosecution alleged that the applicant had a physical relationship with the minor and subsequently refused to marry her because he was already married, leading her to consume poison

However, the DNA report did not substantiate the allegations of sexual relations

Furthermore, testimony from the victim's mother (PW-1) indicated a family altercation involving a co-accused (Abhishek Thakur) on the day of the incident, with no evidence of the applicant's presence or communication with the victim at that time

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS considering the lack of evidence regarding immediate provocation or instigation of suicide

2. Whether the continuous incarceration of the applicant is justified given the negative DNA report and the absence of criminal antecedents

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, regarding bail provisions

It relied on the legal principles established in Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. State of Maharashtra (2025 INSC 990) and Prakash and Others v. State of Maharashtra (2025 INSC 1020), which stipulate that mere harassment or a refusal to marry does not inherently amount to "abetment of suicide" without evidence of instigation in close proximity to the death

The court observed that for a charge of abetment, there must be evidence of active instigation or provocation preceding the suicide

Upon reviewing the case diary and the testimony of PW-1, the court found no material suggesting the applicant communicated with or provoked the victim on the day of the incident; rather, the evidence pointed toward a quarrel with a different co-accused

The court noted that the DNA report failed to confirm sexual relations, weakening the prosecution's narrative under the POCSO Act

Given the applicant's status as an agriculturist with no criminal record and the likely duration of the trial, the court determined that the applicant posed no risk of fleeing or tampering with evidence

The court allowed the application and directed the release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety, subject to conditions including regular court attendance and a prohibition against tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses