Hostility of material witnesses and absence of criminal antecedents justify grant of bail during trial.

The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, concerning Crime No. 182/2025

The prosecution alleged that on October 22, 2024, the deceased (Anita) was found dead at her matrimonial home following a quarrel with the applicant and others the previous day

The post-mortem indicated death due to unnatural brain injury and cardio-respiratory arrest

The applicant was arrested on December 31, 2025, and remained in judicial custody

Following the dismissal of her first bail application, the trial commenced, and material prosecution witnesses (PW1, PW2, and PW3) were examined

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, in light of material prosecution witnesses turning hostile and the prolonged period of incarceration

2. Whether there exists a likelihood of the applicant tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice if released on bail

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, which governs the power of the High Court to grant bail

Substantive charges were registered under Section 103(1) (Punishment for murder) and Section 3(5) (Joint liability/Common intention) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

The court also adhered to established judicial principles regarding bail, emphasizing the assessment of criminal antecedents, socio-economic status, the possibility of tampering with evidence, and the stage of the trial

The court observed that the primary prosecution witnesses—Suhani (PW1), Mukesh (PW2), and Sampat Bai (PW3)—did not support the prosecution’s version during their examination before the trial court

It noted that the applicant was implicated primarily on suspicion and that no incriminating material connecting her to the offence had been seized

The court highlighted the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents and her socio-economic status as a labourer with the responsibility of a minor child, which mitigated the risk of her fleeing from justice

Furthermore, since the material witnesses had already been examined, the court found no likelihood of the applicant tampering with the remaining evidence

The court concluded that the veracity of the allegations would be determined at trial, which would take time to conclude, rendering continued incarceration unnecessary

The court held that given the hostile testimony of material witnesses and the applicant's clean past, there was no compelling reason to continue her incarceration

The applicant was ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 75,000/- with one solvent surety of the same amount, subject to conditions including regular attendance at hearings and a prohibition against tampering with evidence or committing further offences

The order remains effective until the end of the trial unless bail conditions are breached