Madhya Pradesh High Court

Golu @ Rahul vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 June, 2021

Author: Vivek Rusia

                                1



  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT
                  INDORE
  (SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE VIVEK
                   RUSIA)
                    MCRC-27185/2021
   (GOLU @ RAHUL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

Indore, dated :21/06/2021
      Shri Pritesh Kumar N Jain, learned counsel for the
applicant.
      Shri Palash Choudhary, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent/State.
      Shri Nilesh Sharma, learned counsel for the Objector.
      Heard through V.C.
                              ****

This is Second bail application under Section 439, Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connection with Crime No 99/2020, Police-Station- Khetiya, District- Barwani for commission of the offence under Sections 306/34 of I.P.C. (2). As per prosecution story, on 20.06.2020 the complainant lodged an FIR at Police Station- Khetiya, District Barwani against Bika Mahale, Nimba Mahale, Vivek Mahale, Golu @ Rahul Mahale (present applicant), Vandna Mahale, Neeta @ Reeta Mahale and Saku Mahale alleging that on 20.06.2020 deceased Kailash S/o Pandit Patil aged about 33 years left the house without informing anyone. On 20.06.2020, an information received from Police Chowki, Nisarpur, Police-Station- Kukshi, District Dhar that deceased has committed suicide by jumping in the Narmada river. His death body was recovered and merg No.14/2020 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. was registered on 23.06.2020. A suicide note was recovered by the police

which revealed that the deceased had a dispute in respect of construction of wall with his neighbor Nimba S/o Daga Mahale and during this dispute deceased Kailash and his wife Komal were assaulted and abused by Nimba, Vandna, Neeta @ Reeta, [email protected] Rahul, Kaka Bheeka , Saku Bai and Vivek. The Vandna has threatened him that she would falsely implicate him in a rape case. The deceased approached to Sarpanch and others villagers for settlement of dispute but no one heard him. On 18.06.2020 again, he was assaulted, abused and harassed by accused persons due to which he committed suicide by jumping into Narmada River and left a suicide note. Police has registered an FIR against accused persons namely Nimba, Vandna, Neeta @ Reeta, [email protected] Rahul, Kaka Bheeka , Saku Bai and Vivek for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of I.P.C. Thereafter investigation was completed and challan was filed.

(2). One of co-accused Akhilesh was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2020 in MCRC-26368/2020. The First bail application of Bhika and others including present applicant bearing M.Cr.C.No.26911/2020 has been dismissed vide order dated 07.08.2020 on merit. Co- accused Vandna Mahale and Sakubai Mahale have approached before the Apex Court by way of SLP No.50376/2020, which was dismissed as withdrawn. (3). On 08.01.2021, the trail court has framed charges against all the accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 306 R/w 149 of I.P.C. and fixed the case for evidence. On 04.02.2021, no witnesses appeared in the

witness box, therefore, case was posted on 05.02.2021 for recording the evidence of witnesses. On the said date no witnesses was examined and next date was fixed on 26.02.2021 and 27.02.2021 for recording the evidence. But in these dates, the witnesses remained absent. On 27.02.2021, bailable warrant was issued against the witnesses for appearance before court on 19.03.2021. On 19.03.2021, witnesses Komal, Prabhakar, Manilal were examined and released and on the next date 22.03.2021 no one appeared for recording their evidence, therefore, bailable warrant was issued against them. (4). Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the order -sheets of the trial court reveals that there is delay in the trial. The applicant is a youth aged about 23 years and studying in the B.Sc. with no criminal history. There is no specific allegation against him. The allegation of abetment is not against the applicant. So far as suicide note left by the deceased is concerned, the deceased was annoyed against police and other authorities, who did not hear him. (5). Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State opposes the bail application.

(6). Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the bail application by submitting that all accused persons jointly assaulted, abused and instigated, which has abetted the deceased to commit suicide. He has specifically mentioned the mental torture meted out to him in his suicide note. Two co- accused have filed by the SLP before the Apex Court, which came to dismissed as withdrawn. The deceased was working as teacher in a Government

School and has left his entire family by committing suicide.

Parties heard through V.C.

(7). The allegation of abetement against all the accused persons. There is specific allegation against co-accused Vandna, who threatened the deceased for false implication in the criminal case. Being specific allegation against her, she withdrew SLP before Apex Court. So far as, present applicant is concerned, he is student of B.Sc. Final Year. He has no criminal past. The entire family of Nimba Mahale have been implicated in this case. There was a dispute between Nimba and deceased in respect of construction of wall for which the deceased tried to lodge an FIR and made a complaint to the Collector but no one heard him, therefore, he committed suicide.

(8). The 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."

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.

(9). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case but without commenting on the merit of the case, the application is allowed and he is directed to be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousands only) with surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before that Court during the pendency of trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

(10). Before releasing the applicant from custody, the jail authorities are directed to medically examine in order to rule out the possibility of COVID -19 infections and shall comply with the direction given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Writ Petition No. 1/2020.