WhatsApp Texts Don’t Point To Anything Of Untoward Nature: Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Man In Ex-Lover’s Suicide Case
The Delhi High Court was considering a bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), by the applicant.
While noting that the exchange of WhatsApp texts of the deceased with the accused prior to her committing suicide did not point to anything which was of an untoward nature, the Delhi High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a man who was booked for abetting the suicide of his former lover.
The High Court was considering a bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), by the applicant seeking the grant of anticipatory bail in a proceeding arising from an FIR registered under Sections 306, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
The Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee stated, “The exchange of WhatsApp texts of the deceased with the applicant prior to her committing suicide also do not point anything of untoward nature which is, for the time being, sufficient to deny bail to the applicant. More so, since the only allegation is that he did not reply to the texts he received. There are thus no active/ clear act of instigation/ abetment having a direct and proximate link to the commission of suicide.”
Advocate Sarthak Tomar represented the Applicant, while Additional Public Prosecutor Satish Kumar represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
As per the FIR, the complainant’s daughter ended her life by hanging herself from a ceiling fan at her residence after writing two suicide notes. She was immediately taken to a nearby hospital but was declared dead. During the inspection, the investigating team seized two suicide notes, two notebooks, and the deceased’s mobile phone from the scene. The post‑mortem report confirmed the cause of death as asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. The suicide notes, which, upon confirmation by the FSL report, attributed the deceased’s decision to end her life to the applicant and his family members, alleging that the applicant had misled her for two years, promised marriage, and later withdrew under family pressure, and had also established physical relations with her. It was also alleged that he got engaged to another woman.
Upon an application filed by the deceased’s parents under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., the FIR was registered pursuant to the order of the Trial Court.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that though the case of the prosecution was based upon the contents of the alleged suicide notes of the deceased, there was nothing credible enough to substantiate the same.
“It is also not denied that the applicant joined the investigation, however, as per prosecution, he did not give valid responses or produce his mobile phone. Merely not getting the ‘desirable’ answers, is itself not a reason to deny bail, moreover, when the level of non-participation is itself unclear. In any event, the prosecution always has the right to take necessary and proper steps in such a case”, it added.
Thus, imposing certain restrictions, the Bench granted anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Cause Title: Ujjwal v. State (Govt. Of NCT of Delhi) (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:1623)
Appearance
Applicant: Advocate Sarthak Tomar
Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor Satish Kumar, Advocates Upasna Bakshi, Divya Bakshi, SI Naresh Kumar