Dhanaji @ Dhaniya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 4070 MP

                                                            1
                           IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE NANDITA DUBEY
                                                ON THE 15 th OF MARCH, 2023
                                          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9455 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          1.    DHANAJI @ DHANIYA S/O GANPAT MALVIYA,
                                AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCCUPATION: NIL R/O
                                VILLAGE DHAWADIYA P.S. MANDHATA DISTRICT
                                KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    RESHAM BAI W/O DHANAJI MALVIYA, AGED
                                ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O
                                VILLAGE DHAWADIYA P.S. MANDHATA DISTRICT
                                KHANDWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....APPLICANTS
                          (BY SHRI SS RAJPUT-ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                          STATION MANDHATA DISTRICT KHANDWA (MADHYA
                          PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI SHIKHA BAGHEL-PANEL LAWYER)

                                This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

This is the first application filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

The applicants are in custody since 30.1.2023 in connection with Crime No.41/2023 registered at Police Station Mandhata District Khandwa for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of IPC.

A s per prosecution, present applicants threatened and assaulted the Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANZOOR AHMED Signing time: 3/10/2023 5:36:36 PM

deceased on the suspicion that he has broken the drainage pipe, due to which the deceased got scared to the extent that he committed suicide.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the ingredients of Section 107 of IPC are not made out. It was the quarrel between two neighbours. Even if the allegations are taken to be true that the applicants have harassed and beaten the deceased, it was not to such an extent, which may induce him to commit suicide. He has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mariano Anto Bruno and another Vs. the Inspector of Police, reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 834 in support of his contentions. Para 42 of the said judgment reads as under:-

" 4 2 It is well settled that the Courts ought to be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life by committing suicide. Reference may be made to the judgment of a three-Judge Bench of this Court in Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, wherein this Court set-aside the conviction of the accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC as ingredients of Section 306 IPC were not satisfactorily proved. It was observed as under :-

"œ20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANZOOR AHMED Signing time: 3/10/2023 5:36:36 PM

be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.

21. In State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal and Anr., this Court has cautioned that the Court should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life by committing suicide. If it transpires to the Court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the Court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused

charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty."

Learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the bail application. It is stated that the deceased was beaten up and insulted in front of entire village, which induced him to commit suicide. Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANZOOR AHMED Signing time: 3/10/2023 5:36:36 PM

Considering the case dairy statements as well as arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, prima facie the ingredients of Section 107 of IPC are not made out to bring the case of the applicants within the purview of Section 306 of IPC, as the applicants cannot be said to have abetted or instigated the deceased to commit suicide, this application is allowed.

It is directed that applicants be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is further directed that the applicant shall also comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.

In case, if the applicants are found threatening the witnesses during the pendency of the trial or during the bail period, this bail order shall automatically stand cancelled.

Certified copy as per rules.

(NANDITA DUBEY) JUDGE Ansari

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANZOOR AHMED Signing time: 3/10/2023 5:36:36 PM