The delay in lodging an F.I.R. can raise reasonable doubts affecting the veracity of the allegations in a bail application.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita .

3. It is alleged that these petitioners mentally and financially committed torture and harassment to the son of informant as a result of which, he committed suicide.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. As per F.I.R., there was love affair between petitioner no. 1 and son of the informant and rest of the petitioners are simply victims of over implication as they are family members of petitioner no. 1. Moreover, son of the informant committed suicide in Ajaman, UAE due to family dispute and depression. F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay of 32 days, without any plausible explanation, which itself raises doubt over veracity of the prosecution case. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. Considering the nature of accusation and other facts and circumstances of the case, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate-I, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Harsidhi P. S. Case No. 639 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)