JUDGMENT : SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. By means of this application, applicant Sayara Uruuz alias Afsana, who is involved in Case Crime No. 385 of 2020, under section 306 IPC, police station Chamanganj, district Kanpur Nagar, seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. 2. Heard Mr. Rajeev Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Rabindra Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate assisted by Mr. Rajmani Yadav and Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, learned brief holders, representing the State of U.P. and perused the record as well as case diary of the case, produced by the learned A.G.A. Brief facts: 3. In short compass the facts of the case as unfolded by the prosecution are that Sameer Ahmad, who is the son of deceased Shakeel Ahmad moved a written application to the Station House Officer, police station Chamanganj, Kanpur Nagar mentioning therein that her mother has telephonically informed him that on 23.12.2020 at 6.30 a.m. his father Shakeel Ahmad had committed suicide by hanging in the flat, which was entered in G.D. No. 22 dated 23.12.2020 at 8:21 O'clock in the police station. On receiving the aforesaid information, Sub-Inspector-Tanveer Ahmad along with other police personnel reached at the spot, and after preparing inquest report at the spot and taking the opinion of witnesses of inquest, the body of the deceased was sent for post-mortem examination. Thereafter, on the basis of contents of suicide note, which was recovered from the possession of the deceased at the time of conducting inquest proceeding, first information report dated 24.12.2020 has been lodged at 20:52 O'clock by the informant-Tanveer Ahmad, S.I. against the wife of the deceased, namely, Sayara Uruuz alias Afsana (applicant) and one Rajnish Sethi for the alleged commission of abetment of suicide. S ubmissions on behalf of accused/applicant: 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged suicide note is a fabricated document and the same has not been sent for forensic test, hence the same is irrelevant material and cannot be treated as evidence against the applicant. It is also submitted that there is no corroborative evidence to support the contents of alleged suicide note. It is also submitted that there is no corroborative evidence to support the contents of alleged suicide note. The alleged act of the applicant cannot be said to be of such nature, which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option left. Much emphasis has been given by contending that the deceased instead of committing suicide had an option to give “talaq” to his wife (applicant). No case for abetment or instigation of suicide is made out against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedent to her credit and is facing detention since 05.02.2021. It is next contended that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Submissions on behalf of State/opposite party: 5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that deceased was the second husband of the applicant. One Israr Beg, was the first husband of the applicant. Applicant had two children, namely, Ashi and Danish from the wedlock of her first husband (Israr Beg), but on account of her bad habits and illicit relation with other persons, her first husband had given divorce (talaq) to her. Thereafter, she performed her second marriage with the deceased on 19.01.1989, which was their love marriage and from the wedlock of the deceased, she has one son, namely, Samir Ahmad. It is next submitted that at the time of conducting inquest proceeding, a mobile phone and suicide note of seven pages, which was kept in sealed envelop were recovered from the possession of the applicant, which was opened in the presence of higher officers, in which deceased alleged inter-alia that four times, he had caught his wife (applicant) red-handed with other persons. It also stated that she has illicit relation with several persons and she does not want to give-up her relation with them. Much emphasis has been given that bare perusal of the suicide note, it is apparently clear that on account of bad conduct and illicit relation of the applicant with co-accused Rajnish Sethi and other persons mentioned in the suicide note as well as abetment and instigation made by the applicant and co-accused Rajnish Sethi, deceased committed suicide. Much emphasis has been given that bare perusal of the suicide note, it is apparently clear that on account of bad conduct and illicit relation of the applicant with co-accused Rajnish Sethi and other persons mentioned in the suicide note as well as abetment and instigation made by the applicant and co-accused Rajnish Sethi, deceased committed suicide. It is also submitted that the suicide note in question along with samples of hand writing and specimens of signature of the deceased were sent for forensic test to the Vidhi Vigyan Prayogshala, U.P. Rajgarh, Jhansi, which was received in the laboratory on 16.02.2021 and as per report dated 01.03.2021 of the aforesaid laboratory, it has confirmed that said suicide note has been written by the deceased. It is also pointed out that Guddu alias Riyaz (brother of the deceased) in his statement dated 28.12.2020, apart from making serious allegations against the applicant, as mentioned in the suicide note, also alleged inter-alia that deceased before his death had sent his audio and WhatsApp massage from his mobile No. 6392666621 to his mobile No. 8433866110 about his grievances, as mentioned in the suicide note. The said audio/voice recording has been mentioned word by word, by the investigating officer in the case Diary No. 16 dated 17.03.2021 and C.D. (compact disc) of the same has also made part of the case diary. Smt. Zeba (sister), Haji Sohail Ahmad (brother-in-law), Rajeev Malhotra (friend) of the deceased in their statements recorded on 28.12.2020, 17.02.2020 and 17.02.2021 respectively, have also supported the contents of the suicide note. The applicant, who was absconding after the death of the deceased, was arrested on 05.02.2021. The statements of Samir Ahmad (son of the deceased) and other persons, who were the witnesses of the inquest proceeding, were also recorded. It is also pointed out that as per entry made in C.D. No. 19 dated 11.03.2021, on analysis of CDR of mobile number 955988261 of the applicant and mobile number 9839940652 of co-accused Rajnish Sethi, it was found that there were lot of conversations between them. On 22.03.2021, Danish (son of the applicant) gave a mobile phone to the investigating officer and told that the same belongs to her mother (applicant) and through which she used to talk to her friends. There were two sim-cards bearing nos. On 22.03.2021, Danish (son of the applicant) gave a mobile phone to the investigating officer and told that the same belongs to her mother (applicant) and through which she used to talk to her friends. There were two sim-cards bearing nos. 8303336146 and 9559882618 in the said mobile, in which applicant had saved the mobile number 9839940662 of co-accused Rajnish Sethi in the name of “JK.” The applicant after committing suicide by her husband (deceased) sent WhatsApp message to coaccused on 23.12.2020 at 09:45 pm and expressed her happiness by writing Aameen. The said mobile phone has been deposited by the investigating officer in malkhana. Referring the contents of suicide note, statements of Guddu alias Riyaz, Smt. Zeba, Haji Sohail Ahmad, Rajeev Malhotra, Samir Ahmad and Danish and other corroborative evidences submits, that it is a clear case of abetment and instigation by the applicant and co-accused Rajnish Sethi, due to which deceased was compelled to commit suicide. Charge-sheet dated 27.03.2021 has been submitted in this case. No case for bail is made out. Lastly it is submitted that as per the allegation against the applicant, she appears to be a shrewd lady and in case of granting bail, there is every possibility of tampering the prosecution evidences/witnesses. Materials on record: 6. Charge-sheet dated 27.03.2021 has been submitted in this case. No case for bail is made out. Lastly it is submitted that as per the allegation against the applicant, she appears to be a shrewd lady and in case of granting bail, there is every possibility of tampering the prosecution evidences/witnesses. Materials on record: 6. Before delving into the matter, it would be useful to quote the suicide note, statements of Guddu alias Riyaz, Smt. Zeba, Haji Sohail Ahmad and Rajeev Malhotra, which are as under:- ^^6-1 Jh 'kdhy vgen iq= LoxhZ; eqerkt vgen fuoklh edku uacj 105@38 fu;j xq:}kjk peuxat dkuiqj uxj ¼vlj HkkbZ dk fdjk, dk edku½ esjk fudkg 19 tuojh 1989 esa y[kuÅ esa gqvk FkkA esjk dksVZ eSfjt ,d lky ds ckn dkuiqj uxj esa gqvk FkkA lkk;jk m:t mQZ vQlkuk csxe iq=h xqyke eqrZtk fuoklh&deky [kka dk gkrk ubZ lM+d ds fuoklh FksA lk;jk m:t vQlkuk csxe dh igyh 'kknh bljkj csx fuoklh peuxat ls gqbZ Fkh] ftlls nks cPps Fks] ,d csVh vk'kh] ,d csVk nkfu'k] lk;jk m:t mQZ vQlkuk csxe ds xyr dkeks dh otg ls vkSj nwljs O;fDr;ksa ls uktk;t laca/k gksus dh otg ls mlds igys ifr bljkj csx us mls rykd ns fn;k Fkk mldks eksrh>hy esa eSa fdlh O;fDr ds lkFk xkM+h esa ns[kk Fkk o idM+k FkkA lk;jk m:t mQZ vQlkuk csxe eq>s ,d dke ds vM~Ms ij feyh Fkh eq>s mlls I;kj gks x;k lk;jk m:t mQZ vQlkuk csxe ls eSus 'kknh dj fy;kA vkSj cqjs dke ugha djus dks dgk vkSj eSusa iVdkiqj esa edku fdjk, ij ysdj fn;k] lyhe HkkbZ dk edku ikdZ ds ikl fu;j tkek efLtn esa ysdj fn;k] ;g ugha ekuh vkSj fQj ogh ;g xyr dke djrh FkhA eSus bls 4 ckj jaxs gkFkksa idM+kA igyh ckj jkeufxuk flag ds lkFk] nwljh ckj chuk frokjh ds vM~Ms ij ,d dLVej ds lkFk] rhljh ckj jft;k ekSlh ds ?kj esa xqMMw e[kfu;k cktkj dk fuoklh ds lkFk idM+k] pkSFkh ckj vkQrkc vgen fuoklh ubZ lM+d ds lkFk uckcxat esa idM+kA blus pkjks ckj ekQh ekaxh vkSj dle [kk;k dh ekQ dj nhft,A lk;jk m:t mQZ vQlkuk csxe ls esjk ,d csVk lu~ 1992 esa gqvk] 1993 esa csVs dk uke lehj vgen mQZ ckn'kkg j[kkA 1993 esa eSus mldk oFkZMs ySaM ekdZ esa fd;kA bldh otg ls esjh eka vkSj esjk iwjk [kkunku esjs f[kykQ gks x;kA bldh otg esa esjh eka us esjk fgLlk ugha fn;k] tks fd esjk dek;k gqvk FkkA esjh eka us dgk fd bl xyr vkSjr dk lkr NksM+ nks viuk fgLlk ys yksA esjk ,d HkkbZ xqMMw o nks cgus fu[kr o tsck gS tks fd rykd egy jsgekuh ekdsZV fuoklh gSA esjh 'kknh ls jsgekuh ekdsZV ds lHkh yksx og iwjk [kkunku og lekt f[kYkkQ gks x;k D;ksafd lk;jk m:t mQZ vQlkuk csxe ,d cktk: vkSjr Fkh fQj Hkh eSus lk;jk m:t mQZ vQlkuk csxe dk lkFk fn;k vkSj eSus idVkiqj dk edku NksM+ fn;kA vkSj iwue diwj ds edku ik.Mw uxj esa edku fdjk, ij fy;k vkSj vius iSr`d fctusl jcM+ dsfedy dk dke pkyw fd;k vkSj vkSj cgqr iSls dek, eSus vius igys nksuks cPpksa o iRuh dks cgqr I;kj djrk FkkA vkSj cgqr I;kj ls QSfeyh dks ikyk] eSa u dqaokjk Fkk eSus dksbZ 'kknh ugha fd ;g esjh igyh vkSj vkf[kjh 'kknh gSA lk;jk m:t mQZ vQlkuk csxe us ges'kk /kks[kk fn;kA esjh eka bl nqfu;k esa ugha gS eka us dgk fd ,d fnu ;g ,slk /kks[kk nsxh dh rqEgsa vkRegR;k djuh iM+ tk;sxh bl vkSjr us rsjh ftUnxh cckZn dj nhA esjk dguk gS fd ,slh vkSjr ls u rks dksbZ I;kj djsa vkSj u rks dksbZ Hkjkslk djsa ;k flQZ :i;k vkSj v¸;k'kh ds fy, gksrh gSA ;g nqfu;k ds fy, ,d lcd gSA nqfu;k ds lkeus ;g ,d 'kjhQ vkSjr cuh jgrh gS 'kDy ls ;g eklwe vkSj Hkksyh gSA esjk fctusl [kjkc gksus dh otg ls eSa fnYyh pyk x;k vkSj ,d lky fnYyh jgus ds ckn fQj okil vk x;kA fQj iqjkuk fctusl 'kq: fd;k vkSj iwue diwj dk edku fdjk, ij fy;kA bldh v¸;k'kh dh otg ls eSus iwue diwj ds gh edku esa [kqndq'kh djus dh dksf'k'k Hkh dh FkhA bl vkSjr us eq>s cckZn dj fn;k gj oDr :i;s dh fMekaM djrh jgrh gSA esjs igys nksuks cPpks dh 'kknh gks xbZ csVh vk'kh dh 'kknh gYnkuh vkSj csVs dh 'kknh twgh ls gqbZ lcus feydj fd;k vc ckn'kkg dh 'kknh ckdh gSA vkSj eSa tkc ds fy, 2014 esa fnYyh [TRUNCATED] Having heard the argument of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that for abetment of suicide, there must be a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence. The word suicide is nowhere defined in the Indian Penal Code. The meaning of suicide requires no explanation. ‘Sui’ means ‘self’ and ‘cide’ means ‘killing’ thus implying an act of self-killing. No standard or straight jacket formula can be laid down with regard to sensitivity of each individuals, because different people behave differently in same situation. Each person has his own idea of self esteem and self respect. Sometime a comment passed against a person on lighter side are taken very seriously by such persons, who are hyper-sensitive while other persons, who are not so sensitive, behave differently, they ignore even serious comment made against them and try their best to face the situation. Therefore, each case has to be decided on the basis of its own facts and circumstances. If the accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words, deeds or conduct, which may provoke, urge or encourage the deceased to commit suicide is an abetment. To constitute abetment, the intention and involvement of the accused to aid or instigate the commission of suicide is imperative. In a case of suicide, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. 8. It is well settled that every case turns on its own facts. Even one additional or different fact may make a big difference between the conclusion in two cases, because even a single significant detail may alter the entire aspect. Finding : 9. Under the facts of the case, I found that there is a proximate link between the unfortunate incident in question and act of the accused applicant. Though the deceased had died because of hanging, but facts of the case reflect that he was hyper-sensitive man and was very much depressed and feels himself humiliated among his family members, friends and in the society on account of bad habits, immoral act, misbehavior and illicit relation of his wife (applicant) with several other persons as well as his harassment by the applicant, as mentioned by him in his suicide note. From the materials on record, it also shows that despite the best effort and persuasion made by the deceased, the applicant was not willing to give-up her illicit relation with co-accused and other persons and kept on harassing the deceased adopting different modusoperandi. The said facts are corroborated by the statement of the witnesses as well as call details of the applicant with other persons as mentioned above. The deceased in his suicide note has specifically mentioned the aforesaid reasons and other compelling circumstances, which prevailed upon him for committing suicide. The Forensic Science Laboratory test report dated 01.03.2021 has confirmed that said suicide note has been written by the deceased. It is the basic principle of criminal jurisprudence that a man may tell a lie, but circumstances do not. In view of above, I find that allegations and materials against the applicant are of definite nature (not imaginary or inferential one), hence as on date, from the materials available in case diary of this case and as mentioned in preceding paragraph no. 6, prima-facie case for abetment and instigation is made out against the applicant. As a fallout and consequence of aforesaid discussion, the submissions made on behalf of the applicant is not liable to be accepted. Conclusion : 10. On the basis of aforesaid analysis, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced on behalf of parties, complicity of the applicant, gravity of the offence and severity of the punishment, I do not find any good ground to grant bail to the applicant at this stage. Result: 11. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 12. However, it is made clear that the observation contained in the instant order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not effect the merit of the trial.