Raju @ Rajkishore vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1304 MP

 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

                         M. Cr. C. No.17466/2021
          (Raju @ Rajkishore Verma and Another Vs. State of M. P.)
                                   -1-

Indore, dated 06/04/2021

      Shri Omprakash Solanki, learned counsel for the applicants.

      Shri Aditya Garg, learned Government Advocate for the

respondent / State.

This is the first application filed by the applicants Raju @

Rajkishore S/o Shri Saligram Verma and Smt. Chanda W/o Shri

Mahesh under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, who is

apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.21/2021

registered at Police Station Bagdun, Pithampur, District Dhar (M.P.),

concerning offences punishable under Section 306, 34 of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860.

02- As per prosecution Story, the marriage of Rinku and deceased

Vikram held on 15/05/2013. They lived together for 2-3 years after

marriage and Rinku delivered two issues aged about 4-5 years.

Thereafter, she has started living separately. Rinku lodged an FIR

against the deceased on 04/12/2020 at Crime No.566/2020 for

offences punishable under Section 498-A, 294, 323, 506 and 34 of the

IPC. After registration of the aforesaid FIR, in apprehension of arrest

Vikram has committed suicide by hanging himself in his house. Upon

his death, his parents lodged an FIR against Rinku, mother Alka,

father Krishnakant, brother-in-law Sunny, sister-in-law Payal and these

present two applicants. The wife, father and mother have been granted

regular bail by the trial Court.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

M. Cr. C. No.17466/2021 (Raju @ Rajkishore Verma and Another Vs. State of M. P.)

03- Learned counsel for the applicant submit that applicant No.1 is

maternal uncle of the Rinku and applicant No.2 is sister of father of

Rinku (Bhua). They have been implicated because they went along

with the Rinku to lodge FIR and they have been named in the suicide

note also. Learned counsel further submits that Rinku has lodged an

FIR under Section 498-A of the IPC against the husband and she has

resorted the remedy available under the law that cannot said to be an

instigation or abetment to commit suicide.

04- Learned Government Advocate appearing for the

respondent/State opposes the prayer.

05- The law with regard to applicability of Section 306 of IPC is well

settled. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the recent case of

Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

reported in 2020 SCC OnLine SC 964 has again summarised the law

in respect of the scope of section 107 & 306 of the I.P.C. , the relevant

paragraphs are as under:-

"57. Dealing with the provisions of Section 306 of the IPC and the meaning of abetment within the meaning of Section 107, the Court observed:

"12. In order to bring out an offence under Section 306 IPC specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107 IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring about the suicide of the person concerned as a result of that abetment is required. The intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this particular offence under Section 306 IPC. We are of the clear opinion that there is no question of there being any material for offence under Section 306 IPC either in the FIR or in the so-called suicide note."

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

M. Cr. C. No.17466/2021 (Raju @ Rajkishore Verma and Another Vs. State of M. P.)

58. The Court noted that the suicide note expressed a state of anguish of the deceased and "cannot be depicted as expressing anything intentional on the part of the accused that the deceased might commit suicide". Reversing the judgment of the High Court, the petition under Section 482 was allowed and the FIR was quashed."

06- In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, without further

commenting on the merits of the case, it would be appropriate to

enlarge the applicants on bail.

07- It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants in

connection with the aforesaid crime number, they shall be released on

bail upon their each furnishing personal bond in the sum of

Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) with separate surety in

the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. This order

shall be governed by the conditions No.1 to 3 of sub section (2) of

section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicants shall also co-operate with the

investigation.

Certified copy as per rules.

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE Tej Digitally signed by TEJPRAKASH VYAS Date: 2021.04.06 16:46:02 -07'00'