Madhya Pradesh High Court
Renuka vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 October, 2021
Author: Anil Verma
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M. CR. C. No. 43881 / 2021
RENUKA W/O ARJUN Vs. STATE OF MP
--- 1 ---
INDORE, Dated : 08/10/2021
Mr. Sachin Parmar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Bharti Lakkad, learned PL for the respondent -
State.
Mr. Zenith Chhablani, learned counsel for the
respondent - Objector.
This is first application under Section 439 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed on behalf of the applicant
for grant of bail. The applicant is implicated in connection
with Crime No.476/2021 registered at Police Station-
Tarana, Distt. Ujjain (MP) for commission of offence
punishable under Section 306, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The applicant is in custody since 18/8/2021.
As per prosecution story, deceased Sapna @ Ramkanya
was married to co-accused Kishor and out of this wedlock
two children are born. Present applicant Renuka and co-
accused Kishor happened to met in a village and thereafter
they have started talking with each other over phone
regularly and they have developed intimacy and entered into
extra-marital affairs. Under the influence of present
applicant, c-accused Kishor used to regularly assault the
deceased and threaten her to leave her and marry with the
present applicant - Renuka. Due to repeated and regular
assault and torture, Sapna @ Ramkanya committed suicide
on 6/7/2021 by hanging herself. Accordingly, crime has been
registered against the present applicant and co-accused
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M. CR. C. No. 43881 / 2021
RENUKA W/O ARJUN Vs. STATE OF MP
--- 2 ---
Kishor.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely
implicated in this case. Applicant is in custody since
18/8/2021. It is submitted that ingredients of Sec. 306 and
107 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 are not attracted in the
present case. There is no previous criminal antecedents of
the applicant, she is permanent resident of District Ujjain and
final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long
time. He, therefore, prays that applicant be released on bail.
Per contra, learned Government Advocate for
respondent - State opposes the bail application and prays for
its rejection.
Mr. Zenith Chhablani, learned counsel for the objector
opposed the bail application and prays for its rejection. He
has also submitted written objection and contended that the
objector along with few family members visited the co-
accused and requested to quit the extra-marital relationship
with the applicant but applicant and co-accused Kishor did
not stop illicit relationship and due to their torture and
assault, the victim committed suicide and there was no
choice left with her. If the applicant is released on bail, she
will contact the witnesses and tamper the evidence. Hence,
her bail application be rejected.
In view of the law laid down by the
Supreme Court of India in case of Arnab
Manoranjan Goswami Vs State of Maharashtra
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M. CR. C. No. 43881 / 2021
RENUKA W/O ARJUN Vs. STATE OF MP
--- 3 ---
and Others reported in 2020 SCC Online SC 964
has again summarized 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."
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of the allegation and also the fact that no
suicidal note is available on record, there is no relevant
document regarding earlier meeting of the family members
with the co-accused and the present applicant, the applicant
is in custody since 18/8/2021, she is a 24 years old lady, trial
will take considerable long time for its final conclusion,
without commenting upon the merits of the case, I deem it
proper to release the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the application filed by the applicant is
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE
M. CR. C. No. 43881 / 2021
RENUKA W/O ARJUN Vs. STATE OF MP
--- 4 ---
allowed. The applicants is directed to be released on bail on
her furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/-
(Rupees Seventy five thousand only) with one solvent surety
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the trial Court
for her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial
with a condition that she shall remain present before the
court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the
conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973.
Before releasing the applicant from custody, the jail
authorities are directed to medically examine her 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.
Certified copy as per rules.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
KR
Digitally signed by KAMAL RATHORE
Date: 2021.10.08 18:05:36 +05'30'
