Avay Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2098 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                    A.B.A. No.3704 of 2021
                             ------

    Avay Kumar                      .... .... .... Petitioner
                             Versus
    The State of Jharkhand          .... .... .... Opposite Party
                             ------
CORAM        : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
                                       ------
     For the Petitioner          : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate
     For the State               : Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, Addl.P.P
                                       ------
     Order No.02 Dated- 29.06.2021
             Heard the parties through video conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

In view of personal undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Sukhdeonagar Pandra O.P. P.S. Case No.208 of 2020 instituted under Sections 306 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has abetted the suicide of the deceased- Nisha Kumari. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court towards judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in AIR 2002 Supreme Court 1998 para-12 of which reads as under:-

12. "Xxxxxxxx Even if we accept the prosecution story that the appellant did tell the deceased "to go and die", that itself does not constitute the ingredient of "instigation". The word "instigate" denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable action or to stimulate or incite. Presence of mens rea, therefore, is the necessary concomitant of instigation. It is common knowledge that the words uttered in a quarrel or on the spur of the moment cannot be taken to be uttered with mens rea. It is in a fit of anger and emotional. Secondly, the alleged abusive words, said to have been told to the deceased were on 25-7-1998, ensued by a quarrel. The deceased was found hanging on 27-7-1998. Assuming that the deceased had taken the abusive language seriously, he had enough time in between to think over and reflect and, therefore, it cannot be said that the abusive language, which had been used by the appellant on 25-7-1998 drove the deceased to commit suicide. xxxxxxX"

submits that even assuming for the sake of argument that there was love affairs and the petitioner did not agree to marry with the deceased, still there was enough time for the deceased to think over and therefore, it cannot be said that the same constitutes any of the ingredients of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. It is next submitted that in para-21 of the case diary, the statement of the witness Mamta Yadav is appearing who has categorically stated about the unsuccessful love affairs between the petitioner and the deceased and the same being the probable reason for commission of suicide by the deceased. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court of learned J.M.- 1st Class, Ranchi within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned J.M.- 1st Class, Ranchi in connection with Sukhdeonagar Pandra O.P. P.S. Case No.208 of 2020 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/