1. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar, alongwith Sri Mukul Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

2. Applicant Kamaruddin is the main accused in Case Crime No. 594 of 2020 (S.T. No. 355 of 2021), under Section 306 I.P.C, Police Station Anoopshahar, District - Bulandshahr.

3. The applicant has moved bail application supported with an affidavit and Annexures, stating therein that on 16.11.2020 at about 01:00 p.m. in the noon informant's daughter committed suicide after closing the door of the room hanging upon a Kunda of room, leaving a suicide note on the place of occurrence alleging that the present accused-applicant and co-accused Mobin and Abrar are the reason behind her suicidal death.

4. Earlier also F.I.R in Case Crime No. 549 of 2020, U/s 366, 376 and 354 I.P.C was lodged by the deceased against them.

5. After inquest, during the postmortem ligature mark in size of 29 c.m x 2 c.m present around the neck was found. The Doctor opined that the deceased had died due to Asphyxia arised out of ante-mortem hanging. The first informant has reiterated the version of the F.I.R in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. In suicide note it was stated that the deceased was B.A and was the student of LL.B (Ist Year) and applicant - accused Kamaruddin used to come to her frequently. On 03.10.2020, when she went to the Bank, all the accused persons carried her in a vehicle and tried to rape her for which she had lodged F.I.R. Later on when the applicant made an apology and proposed that if she gives favourable statement, he would marry with her. Thereafter, the deceased had given statement in favour of the applicant. On 16.10.2020, after receiving the message of the applicant, she came out of the village at about Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:72961 04:00 p.m. wherefrom she was forcibly taken by the accused persons and on the pretext of marriage, the applicant committed rape with her and Mobin and Abrar made a illicit video clips of the incident and after describing fear of video they both also committed rape with her and left her in Kasba Chhata and also threatened that if she lodged any case, they would viral that video.

6. The applicant has taken ground that there is no iota of evidence that the applicant had tortured and abetted the applicant. In case crime No. 505 of 2020 under Sections 506, 366 & 354 I.P.C, the victim had denied the allegations in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The applicant met to the deceased on 03.10.2020 and thereafter an F.I.R in Case No. 549 of 2020 under Sections 366, 376, 354 I.P.C had been lodged in which the applicant has been released on bail by this Court on 11.11.2022 in Criminal Misc. bail Application No. 29731 of 2022. The present case is connected with the above two cases, except these cases, there is no any criminal history to his credit. The statement of the deceasedvictim P.W. 1 in the previous case is contrary to her statement under Section161 Cr.P.C. After meeting between the deceased and accused on 03.10.2020, the deceased had committed suicide on 16.11.2020, therefore no case of abetment to commit suicide is made out. Co-accused Abrar and Mobin have been released on bail by the Apex Court and this Court respectively by orders dated 21.11.2022 and 28.11.2022. His bail application has been illegally rejected by the Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr vide order dated 15.03.2022. He is in jail since 17.11.2020. He is a peace loving and law abiding citizen, there is no likelihood of his abscondance and tempering with the prosecution evidence, he is ready to follow all the conditions of bail and is ready to fully cooperate in the trial, therefore the bail application be allowed.

7. The learned A.G.A opposed the bail application and argued that since long the accused persons were committing the crime with the deceased and had made her life worse and hell. They used to rape her repeatedly by showing fear of making the video viral. For an offence of abetment to commit suicide, now-a-days, it is not necessary to abet such offence physically or personally, but it can be made through Whats-app, Face-book, E-mail etc. or through any other way. In this case after meeting with the deceased on 03.10.2022, the accused-applicant used to threat her and abated her for committing suicide, therefore, having no any alternative, for the sake of her dignity, respect and honour, the deceased committed suicide. The applicant is the main accused, therefore no parity of grant of bail can be tendered to the applicant.

8. After hearing the argument and after perusal of the papers, it reveals that firstly a case under Sections 366, 354 and 506 I.P.C in Case Crime No. 520 of 2020 was registered in P.S. Anoopshahar, District Bulandshahar against applicant- Kamruddin, in which after getting assurance of the marriage, the deceased had given a hostile statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Later on, again an F.I.R in Case Crime No. 549 of 2020 under Sections 366, 354-Ka, 504 and 376-D I.P.C was registered against the applicant and the co-accused persons in the same Police Station, in which the co-accused Abrar and Mobin had been granted bail by another Bench of this Court and on the basis of parity the present applicant had also been granted bail on 11.11.2022 by Court No. 54 of this Court through Bail Application No. 29731 of 2022. At the time of allowing the bail, the period of languishment in jail was also considered, at that time the present applicant was in jail since 17.11.2020. By that order several conditions were imposed upon the applicants.

9. Learned A.G.A pointed out that conditions imposed by this Court were not complied with by the applicant and he was continuously tendering false promise of marriage and by alluring her all the accused persons raped her again and again thereafter the deceased came in delirious conditions. The accused persons had threatened the deceased that if she told anyone about this incident, they would make her porno-graphical videos viral. According to the informant the deceased had told him and her mother about the incident that had happened with her when she recovered.

10. Learned A.G.A also argued that there was no enmity or ground to falsely implicate the applicant-accused. In suicide note the deceased has written that she was the student of LL.B Ist Year the accused Kamruddin was the resident of her village, who used to come to her house and used to talk with her. After sometime they both started talking through mobile as well. Taking advantage of this, on 3.10.2020, when she was going to Bank, Kamruddin alongwith his friends took her in his car and tried to forcibly rape her. Later on, he apologized and started weeping and said that if she did not give statement in his favour, the matter will escalate. He will marry with her, thereafter she stated in his favour, after that on 16.10.2020 accused- Kamruddin sent a message at 04:00 ‘O’ Clock in the morning and called her on the road, outside of the village, where other two persons were also present. He took her in a car and there Kamruddin made a relationship with her on the pretext of marriage and said that now she might go right now. Now none of them would do anything, she might go anywhere. No one would harm her, go somewhere and die. Instead of Kamruddin, Anwar and Mobin, these three persons also raped her and ruined her life, left her nowhere to show her face, ruined her carrier and her future and forced her to die and also threatened that if any action was taken, her video would go viral, if they would have gone to jail. The family members and the police no one trusts her. She had no any other way to assure the parents. In the last line the deceased has written that she was committing suicide and for this Kamruddin, Anwar and Mobin were responsible. The police was also not doing anything. Pardon her, mom and dad SABA (deceased).

11. Learned A.G.A argued that if Kamruddin would not have done wrong, she would not have committed suicide. The role of rest two accused is much lesser and different than the role of present accused-applicant Kamruddin. In this case the informant has lost his young daughter and earlier instances show that the applicantaccused succeeded in getting the hostile statement from the deceased under the pressure and in the subsequent case under Sections 366, 376, 364-B I.P.C, the conditions imposed regarding the enlargement of bail have been mis-utilised by the accused. (Sanjay Chandra Vs. C.B.I A.I.R 2012 (S.C) 830.) Except this case the accused-applicant is also the prime accused in rest crime numbers 594 of 2020 and 505 of 2020

12. In Ash Muhammad Vs. Shiv Raj Singh (2012) 9 S.C.C 446, considering the criminal antecedent, the Apex Court cancelled the bail granted by the High Court and observed that the concept of personal liberty of the person is not realm of absolutism, but is restricted one. Incarceration in Jail has no significance and no element in society can act in a manner by consequence of which life or liberty of others is Jeopardised.

13. In Bhagat Singh Vs. State of U.P. 2009 (66) A.C.C 859 (Alld.) in Ravi Khandelwal Vs State of U.P. 2009 (67), A.C.C 148 (Alld.), and in Rajesh Ranjan Yadav Vs. Pappu Yadav Vs. C.B.I A.I.R 2007 (S.C) 451, similar view has been taken by the Apex Court in Amar Nath Yadav Vs. State of Punjab & Haryana 2009 (67) (A.C.C) 534 Alld, Shah Narain Vs. State of U.P. 2009 (66) A.C.C 189 Alld. and Ajmer Singh Vs. State of Haryana (2010) (5) S.C.J. 451, that it is not the universal rule that bail should be granted to the co-accused on the ground of parity. Parity cannot be the sole ground of bail, as judge is not bound to grant bail on the ground of parity.

14. On the basis of above discussion, this Court finds the bail application without any merit and is accordingly rejected.