Allahabad High Court
Chandan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 May, 2025
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:92789
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 3803 of 2025
Applicant :- Chandan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Chandra Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vikas Yadav
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ram Chandra Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Yadav, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.
3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 107 of 2025, under Sections 108, 351(2) of BNS, Police Station - Dhanghata, District - Sant Kabir Nagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established close relationship with the victim by entangling her into love and is even stated to have threatened her to make viral the said conversations made between the parties. Subsequently, the victim is stated to have committed suicide by consuming some poisonous material.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is maliciously being prosecuted in the present case due to ulterior motive and has apprehension of his arrest. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged by the prosecution. The FIR is delayed by about 15 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.
6. Learned counsel has further stated that there is no overt act assigned to the applicant of having abetted the deceased to commit suicide, as such, no offence u/s 108 BNS is made out against him. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed, he will not misuse the liberty and shall cooperate with trial.
7. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.
8. The Supreme Court in Ude Singh and Ors. vs. State of Haryana, (2019) 17 SCC 301 observed:-
"16. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be a proof of direct or indirect act/s of incitement to the commission of suicide. It could hardly be disputed that the question of cause of a suicide, particularly in the context of an offence of abetment of suicide, remains a vexed one, involving multifaceted and complex attributes of human behavior and responses/reactions. In the case of accusation for abetment of suicide, the Court would be looking for cogent and convincing proof of the act/s of incitement to the commission of suicide. In the case of suicide, mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by another person would not suffice unless there be such action on the part of the accused which compels the person to commit suicide; and such an offending action ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence. Whether a person has abetted in the commission of suicide by another or not, could only be gathered from the facts and circumstances of each case.
16.1. For the purpose of finding out if a person has abetted commission of suicide by another; the consideration would be if the accused is guilty of the act of instigation of the act of suicide. As explained and reiterated by this Court in the decisions abovereferred, instigation means to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. If the persons who committed suicide had been hypersensitive and the action of accused is otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be safe to hold the accused guilty of abetment of suicide. But, on the other hand, if the accused by his acts and by his continuous course of conduct creates a situation which leads the deceased perceiving no other option except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the four-corners of Section 306 IPC. If the accused plays an active role in tarnishing the self esteem and self-respect of the victim, which eventually draws the victim to commit suicide, the accused may be held guilty of abetment of suicide. The question of mens rea on the part of the accused in such cases would be examined with reference to the actual acts and deeds of the accused and if the acts and deeds are only of such nature where the accused intended nothing more than harassment or snap show of anger, a particular case may fall short of the offence of abetment of suicide. However, if the accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words or deeds until the deceased reacted or was provoked, a particular case may be that of abetment of suicide. Such being the matter of delicate analysis of human behaviour, each case is required to be examined on its own facts, while taking note of all the surrounding factors having bearing on the actions and psyche of the accused and the deceased."
9. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (2020) 5 SCC 1". The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of Supreme Court.
10. Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.
11. In the event of arrest of the applicant, Chandan, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-
i. that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
ii. that the applicant 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;
iv. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial;
v. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;
vi. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;
12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant.
13. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date:- 29.5.2025
Siddhant
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
