Virendra Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3225 MP

                                                                         1
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
                                                                     BEFORE
                                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY
                                                               ON THE 8th OF MARCH, 2022

                                                    MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 60645 of 2021

                                            Between:-
                                            VIRENDRA YADAV S/O SHRI SALIKRAM YADAV,
                                            AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: DRIVER
                                            R/O 1285 STREET NO. 7, NAV JEEVAN COLONY
                                            CHHOLA MANDIR BHOPAL M.P. (MADHYA
                                            PRADESH)

                                                                                                          .....APPLICANT
                                            ( SHRI PRADEEP NAVERIYA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
                                            APPLICANT )

                                            AND

                                            THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR. P.S.
                                            CHOLA MANDIR, DISTT. BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                            PRADESH)

                                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT.
                                            (SHRI AKHILENDRA SINGH, LEARNED G.A. FOR THE RESPONDENT
                                            / STATE )

                                         This M.Cr.C. coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                                   following:
                                                                          ORDER

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Applicant Virendra Yadav was arrested on 24.06.2021 in connection with Crime No.442/2021 registered at Police Station Chhola Mandir, District Bhopal (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC.

A s per prosecution case, on 13.05.2021 deceased Rajita Yadav wife of applicant committed suicide by hanging herself. It is alleged that applicant had illicit relation with another woman and due to which he used to harass and assaulted the deceased Ranjita Yadav due to which she committed suicide.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. It is further submitted that deceased Ranjita Yadav committed suicide after 10 years of her marriage. Even if it is Signature Not Verified SAN

assumed that applicant harassed the deceased Ranjita Yadav, on that basis also it Digitally signed by NAVEEN KUMAR SARATHE Date: 2022.03.08 17:06:02 IST cannot be said that applicant abetted the deceased Ranjita Yadav to commit

suicide. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in CRA No. 514/2011 ( Anil Patel Vs. State of M.P.) decided on 18.02.2019 . The applicant has been in custody since 24.06.2021, charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will

take time, hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that applicant used to harass and assaulted the deceased Ranjita Yadav due to which she committed suicide, so he should not be released on bail.

The facts of the above mentioned case as relied upon by learned counsel for the applicant do not match with the present case. In that case there is no allegation against the accused that he used to harass the deceased or assaulted her while in this case it is alleged that applicant used to harass and assaulted the deceased. So, the aforesaid judgment does not assist the applicant.

Whether the accused had by his acts and by his continuous course of conduct created such a situation as a consequence of which the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide; Whether from the evidence, prima facie offence under section 306 IPC is made out against the accused or not has to be considered on the basis of evidence of each case.

The Apex Court in the case of Praveen Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal, (2012) 9 SCC 734 held "Âœit is apparent that instigation has to be gathered from the circumstances of a particular case. No straitjacket formula can be laid down to find out as to whether in a particular case there has been instigation which forced the person to commit suicide. In a particular case, there may not be direct evidence in regard to instigation which may have direct nexus to suicide. Therefore, in such a case, an inference has to be drawn from the circumstances and it is to be determined whether circumstances had been such which in fact had created the situation that a person felt totally frustrated and committed suicide." It is alleged that applicant used to harass and assaulted the deceased. It is also alleged that applicant had illicit relation with another woman due to which he used Signature Not Verified SAN to harass and assaulted the deceased Ranjita Yadav which led her to commit Digitally signed by NAVEEN KUMAR SARATHE suicide. So, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the allegation Date: 2022.03.08 17:06:02 IST

against the applicant, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Hence, the M.Cr.C. is rejected.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE sarathe

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by NAVEEN KUMAR SARATHE Date: 2022.03.08 17:06:02 IST