Allahabad High Court
Nankey Giri And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. on 2 January, 2024
Author: Pankaj Bhatia
Bench: Pankaj Bhatia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:175
Court No. - 12
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13864 of 2023
Applicant :- Nankey Giri And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Nath Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gyanendra Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Affidavits filed by learned AGA-1 for the State are taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perused the record.
3. In compliance of the order passed by this Court, the Superintendent of Police, District Balrampur as well as Sub-Inspector Sri Nar Singh are present before this Court today. Personal affidavits filed by the said S.P. And the I.O. are taken on record and their explanation is accepted.
4. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State as well as Sri Gyanendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant.
5. In terms of the FIR which was registered on 05.09.2023, it was alleged that on 31.08.2023, the son of the brother of the informant who was studying in class 12 had gone to celebrate a festival of Rakhi to his sister, namely, Arati Devi and Malti Devi. After getting Rakhi tied, his uncles, the three persons named in the FIR, had some altercation with him with regard to the right of passage. It is further alleged that on the said date, the said three accused persons had misbehaved with the brother of the informant and had used derogatory words against him and also hit him with fists. It was further alleged that the brother of the informant felt humiliation with the said allegation and on 01.09.2023 at about 2:00 pm, he committed suicide by hanging. It was also informed that the said information was received by the informant on 01.09.2023 and with the help of the police room was opened and the body of the victim was brought to the ground. It was alleged in the FIR that the three persons named in the FIR who were also the uncles of the victim had strongly abused and had threatened to kill him and on account of the said abuses, the brother of the informant committed suicide out of fear and humiliation.
6. In the light of the said allegation contained in the FIR, the argument of the counsel for the applicants is that admittedly the information with regard to the death was received by the informant on 01.09.2023, however, no FIR in question was lodged and only an information was given that the brother of the informant was found hanging in a room. As per the information, the said allegation is on record as Annexure No.2.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants has also drawn my attention to the inquest report which records two ligature marks on the body in question. The subsequent post-mortem report also indicated two ligature marks apart from four contusions on the face, on the right foot, on the right leg and on the thigh. He thus argues that even for the sake of argument, it is presumed that the injuries were caused by the applicants, no ingredients so as to attract Section 107 IPC are existent in the FIR.
8. It is further argued that once an information was given on 01.09.2023, there is no explanation of the delay of lodging a formal FIR on 05.09.2023.
9. In the light of the said above, the argument, the submission of the counsel for the applicants is that prima facie the applicants cannot be tried for an offence under Section 306 IPC as the ingredients for abetment as defined under Section 107 IPC are prima facie missing.
10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant and the learned AGA for the State opposed the bail application by arguing that the boy who committed suicide was very talented and on account of humiliation faced by him, he committed suicide.
11. It is further argued that the allegation in the FIR as well as in the post-mortem report clearly indicate that the boy was beaten up by the accused and on account of the same, coupled with humiliation, he committed suicide.
My attention is also drawn to the statement of the witnesses to the altercation wherein they stated that the accused had told the victim that he may go somewhere and die either by drowning or by hanging and they do not care.
12. In the light of the statement of the witnesses recorded on 14.09.2023, it is argued that the applicants are not entitled for bail and his bail application deserves to be rejected.
13. There is no denial of the fact that the applicants have only one criminal antecedent for the offence under Sections 323, 325 and 504 IPC in which the applicants are on bail..
14. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that the FIR which was lodged it was alleged that on account of a dispute, an altercation took place which resulted in injuries being inflicted upon the victim and on account of the said humiliation and fear, the victim allegedly committed suicide. The statements of the two witnesses recorded on 14.09.2023 are to the effect that the applicants had asked the victim to go and die either by drowning or by hanging and on account of the same, the victim ultimately committed suicide. The said ingredients apart from the statements of the witnesses prima facie do not fall within the definition of abetment to suicide under Section 107 IPC for punishing an accused for an offence under Section 306 IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants placed reliance on judgment rendered in the case of M. Mohan vs State represented by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (2011) 3 SCC 626. As regards the statements of the witnesses, heavily relied upon by the learned counsel for the informant and the learned AGA for the State, the same clearly appears to be after-thought as no such mention was made in the FIR or even in the statement given by the informant.
5. It is also essential to notice that a suicide note is on record and has been filed as Annexure No.5 to the bail application wherein the boy had written the there should be no fight in the family. It was also recorded that on account of tension in the family the victim was committing suicide. From the said suicide note also, prima facie ingredients of Section 107 IPC cannot be traced as also explained by the Supreme Court in the case of Mariano Anto Bruno and Anothe vs. Inspector of Police 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 834 and the applicants have no criminal antecedents except one case for offence under Sections 323, 325 and 504 IPC and there is nothing to demonstrate that the applicants being enlarged on bail can adversely affect the trial.
16. In view of the above, the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail, as such, the bail application is allowed.
17. Let the applicants Nankey Giri And Another be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.487 of 2023, under Section 306, 323, 504, 506 IPC P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Balrampur on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties of Rupees 25000/- each with the following conditions:
(a) The applicants shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;
(b) The applicants shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which they are accused or suspected of the commission; and;
(c) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 2.1.2024
Manoj K.
