Punjab-Haryana High Court
Binidiya Devi vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 12 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
2024:PHHC:035466
2024:PHHC:035469
2024:PHHC:035471
2024:PHHC:035473
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
****
I. CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M)
Kela Devi and another .....Petitioners
Vs.
State of Haryana and another .....Respondents
II. CRM-M-64260-2023
Bindiya Devi .....Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and another .....Respondents
III. CRM-M-548-2024
Ishwar Dayal Ranga .....Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and another .....Respondents
IV. CRM-M-554-2024
Pankaj .....Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and another .....Respondents
****
Reserved On.: 06.03.2024
Pronounced On: 12.03.2024
****
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Argued By: Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate for the
petitioners in CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M).
Mr. Anuj Saxena, Advocate with
Mr. Shubham Sagar, Advocate for the
petitioner(s) in CRM-M-64260-2023;
CRM-M-548-2024 & CRM-M-554-2024.
Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Brijesh Kumar, Advocate
for the complainant.
1 of 15
::: Downloaded on - 14-03-2024 05:39:30 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
This order shall dispose of four petitions titled above, as all of
them have arisen out of same FIR. All the petitioners are praying for
anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., in a case arising out of FIR No.255
dated 30.10.2023 registered at Police Station Panipat Sadar, Panipat under
Section 306 of the IPC.
2. Separate status reports have been filed in all the four cases.
3. One Sushil Kumar son of Sheo Chand used to work as Manager in
Oil Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Panipat. Said Sushil
committed suicide on 30.10.2023 leaving behind a suicide note, in which all
the petitioners besides others have been blamed for taking the extreme step.
4. All the petitioners are closely related to each other. Smt. Kela
Devi and Mahipal [petitioners in CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M)] are the parents
of Bindiya Devi [petitioner in CRM-M-64260-2023]. Pankaj [petitioner in
CRM-M-554-2024] is the husband of Bindiya Devi; whereas Ishwar Dayal
Ranga [petitioner in CRM-M-548-2024] is the father-in-law of Bindiya Devi
i.e., father of Pankaj.
5. FIR was lodged on the complaint of Subhash, the brother of
deceased Sushil. As per the statement of Subhash, the author of the FIR, his
brother was not going to work at Refinery for the last 15-20 days and when he
was asked the reason for not going to work, he had told that he was not going
due to some employees of the refinery, contractors, Bindiya and her family. He
did not tell anything else and remained silent. On 30.10.2023, he committed
Page N: 2 of total 15 Pages
2 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
suicide with his revolver and left behind a suicide note.
6. On getting information. police reached the spot and conducted
proceedings under Section 174 IPC. Though 10 persons are stated to have been
named in the suicide note to be responsible for commission of suicide by the
deceased but four of them namely Neha Upadhayay, Shiv Shankar, Bipul
Ranjan and Durgesh Pandey were found to be innocent by the Investigating
Officer, which was also verified by the SHO concerned.
7. Before referring to the contentions raised by the petitioners, it will
be relevant to mention the contents of the suicide note (Annexure R1 in CRM-
M-64260-2023), which is in 6 pages and in Hindi script. Its English translation
is as under:
"Bindiya,
True Story
Bindiya, you and your family members, your husband, your father-in- law
have looted me a lot. By trapping me in the CD affair, you got sold my house
to your father. You got my 30 Lakhs worth house sold for 13 Lakhs. Rs.
62,000/- in the account of Pankaj, 2-3 Lakhs in the account of Ravi, 3 Lakhs
cash to Pankaj, Rs. 2 Lakhs cash to your father-in-law, Rs. 14.80 Lakhs got
spent on your marriage, Rs. 2 Lakhs got spent on the marriage of Ashok,
Chain, Mangalsutra, Ring, Rani Haar.
Firstly, you married me, prepared C.D., blackmailed, looted, then
deceptively got the child in your womb so she could loot me entire life.
Pankaj Ji, the elder son is mine, get DNA done. Its true. Bindiya Jaan, return
back all the money to my son Prince. You were mine. I wasted everything on
you. Remember those days, when you used to stay in the hotels for 4-5 days
and have fun. You aborted the child for 04-05 times. Just remember those
moments. Remember them. Remember. Want to write many things Bindiya
but I don't feel like writing. You quickly come to me. I have been craving for
Page N: 3 of total 15 Pages
3 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
the past 8 years without you. Either you also suffer or come to me. I will
welcome you there. You made me cry a lot Bindiya. Because of you, there
used to be fights in my house every day. Yes, I spent Rs. 4.3 Lakhs on your
MBA. Your brother Aman took Rs. 1.12 Lakhs in his account a year ago from
me on the pretext that he will get you talk to me. But he betrayed me. See,
your brother also betrayed me using your name for Rs.1.12 lakhs. Get it
returned plz. Do you still want to live. The CD which is with your mother-
father, do hand over that CD of you and me to Savita
Money to be paid by me:
Labh Singh Ji - 29000/-
Ajay (Store) - 5200/-
Kamlesh (Sister) - 5000/-
Sd/-
This Bindiya, Pankaj, father of Pankaj, father of Bindiya, mother of
Bindiya Keladevi, all these are responsible for my death. Aman is equally
responsible for my death.
Bindiya, you were mine, then how come you changed.
I.L.U. dear Bindiya
I was forced to live with suffocation because of the environment
created by Kalyan Upadhyay, DGM in the office. DGM along with Vipul
Ranjan, Shiv Shankar, Neha and Durgesh Panday insulted me a lot, as I am a
SC person. Neha Upadhyay is a very mean girl. They troubled me a lot in last
4-5 months.
Maro Saalo tum bhi
Sd/-
Sushil Kumar
MTM (Store)
Panipat Refinery 9215652668
29/10/23 Sushil Kumar
Page N: 4 of total 15 Pages
4 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
I want to tell this very truly that my wife was always right, I was
always wrong. I did thousand mistakes in my life, my wife had always
forgiven me. My wife is like a goddess. No one should annoy her in any way.
If possible, help her in life. My son is an innocent, help my son also
Savita, I request not to fight with anyone for me. Forgive everyone.
Son Prince, take care of yourself, also take care of Jhanvi, live life with love
Son.
Sd/-
Sushil Kumar
My dead body be handed over to my younger brother Subhash and
don't give it to my wife at all. Mobile number of my brother is 9255552376,
don't perform the postmortem. Minimum of 8 copies of death certificate be
given to Subhash. He will keep it safe. Can be useful anytime in life. Subhash
(My brother) will contest the case against the persons whom are responsible
for my death. I give this responsibility to my brother. My last rites be
performed in my village Rair Kalan.
Thanking you,
My brother Subhash is more than Lakshman for me. Do respect him.
Sd/-
Sushil Kumar
9215652668
My revolver be sold and the money be invested in the Ambedkar Bhawan.
License of the revolver is in the Almirah.
Sd/-
Sushil Kumar
3/10/23
I have sold my car and mobile. Don't care about them.
Sd/
Following are the persons who are responsible for my death.
(1) Bindiya W/o Pankaj Flate No
(2) Pankaj S/o I.D. Rega 702/Tangle Wood
(3) I.D. Rega Omega-City Sonipat
(4) Mahipal
Page N: 5 of total 15 Pages
5 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
(5) Keladevi W/o Mahipal Tehsil XXX
(6) Aman S/o Mahipal (Baupur Vale)
(7) Shiv Shiv Shankar-MTM Troubled me a lot in the office
(8) Neha Upadhyay - AMTM (Asstt. Material Manager troubled
me a lot in the office
(9) Durgesh Pandey Asst. Manager troubled me a lot in
the office.
(10) Bipul Ranjan SMTM, he is such a scoundrel, used
to cause a lot of trouble in the
office, beat him up.
Mahipal, Kela, Aman, Bindiya, Pankaj, I.D Rega together robbed 50
Lakhs by threatening me with C.D.
These are the persons from whom I have to take money:-
Azad Narwal Contractor- 1.51 Crore
Naresh Sheti- 1210, Se-18, Panipat - 4.32 L
Ragvir Singh - 14 Lack
L1-4.51 Crore
Sd/-MTM
To whom I have to give back the money
Rajkumar Sharma Ji - 1.94 Lakhs
Sd/- MTM"
Contentions on behalf of petitioner Bindiya Devi (CRM-M-64260-2023):
8.1 It is contended by learned counsel that petitioner is a mother of a
toddler and a school going child; and a victim of child abuse at the hands of the
deceased. Petitioner came in touch with the deceased in 2003, when her father
was employed with CISF and they used to reside in CISF residential quarter in
Panipat, whereas deceased, working in IOCL Refinery, Panipat was living with
his wife and children in the residential quarters allocated by IOCL. On the
pretext of socializing, deceased formed friendship with the petitioner's father.
Page N: 6 of total 15 Pages
6 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
At that time, petitioner was a child aged 15 years, whereas deceased was 31
years old. The two families used to go together for traveling. On a day by
getting opportunity, deceased grabbed her, sexually molested her and clicked
photographs in compromising position and used those photographs as a
leverage to further sexually exploit her, as and when he got opportunity.
Petitioner endured years of torture and harassment in this situation. On getting
opportunity, she with her family shifted to Bombay in 2004 but deceased kept
on haunting her, as he reached there un-announced, stayed with her family and
molested her on three occasions and threatened not to disclose the incident to
her parents. Petitioner and her family came back to Panipat in 2008 but
deceased kept on harassing her sexually as and when he got opportunity.
8.2 Ld. Counsel submits further that even after marriage of the
petitioner, the deceased kept on interfering in her married life. He even started
visiting the matrimonial house of the petitioner by pretending to be the friend
of her father. As behaviour of the deceased raised suspicion, petitioner's father-
in-law requested him to refrain from visiting the house. However, deceased
was determined to ruin the marriage of the petitioner. He started contacting the
husband of the petitioner and sent messages to him to break the marriage.
8.3 Learned counsel for the petitioner also contends that the deceased
was frustrated as petitioner was not in his contact for the last more than five
years ever since 2018, as petitioner had deliberately distanced herself from him
by cutting all the communications.
8.4 Learned counsel contends further that ingredients of Section 107
Page N: 7 of total 15 Pages
7 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
to be read with Section 306 of the IPC are completely missing in the case, as
there nothing to suggest any abetment on the part of the petitioner for the
deceased to have committed suicide; that petitioner is ready to join the
investigation and so, she be allowed anticipatory bail.
8.5 Learned counsel has referred to "Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar
v. State of M.P." 2002 (2) RCR (Criminal) 687 besides "S.S. Chheena v. Vijay
Kumar Mahajan & Anr" 2010 RCR (Criminal) 66.
Contentions on behalf of petitioner Kela Devi and Mahipal (CRM-M-
58885-2023):
9. It is contended by learned counsel for these petitioners that the
allegations levelled in the suicide note are against their daughter Bindiya Devi,
with whom the deceased was having physical relations. The petitioners have
been implicated on the basis of statement that deceased had sold a house worth
₹30,00,000/- to petitioner Mahipal for ₹13,00,000/-, though the registry was
executed in the name of Kela Devi and that this was done on the asking of
Bindiya Devi. Learned counsel contends that despite lapse of more than 06
years from the sale deed, copy of which is Annexure P-2, said sale deed was
never challenged before any competent Court. Besides, since 2017 petitioners
had never met the deceased and so, there could be no question of any abetment
on the part of petitioners to the deceased to take the extreme step to end his
life.
Contentions on behalf of petitioner Ishwar Dayal Ranga (CRM-M-548-
2024):
Page N: 8 of total 15 Pages
8 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
10.1 Petitioner Ishwar Dayal Ranga is the father-in-law of Bindiya
Devi, who contends that charges stemming from tragic outcome of a child
molester's suicide, after eight years of the collapse of extra marital affair with
the petitioner's daughter-in-law. Learned counsel contends that suicide note
bears the weight of profound frustration arising out of the said collapse of the
extra-marital affair and has a sinister motive to wreck personal vengeance.
Learned counsel contends that due to unwarranted acts of the deceased,
petitioner had restricted the entry of the said deceased into his house after the
marriage of the petitioner's son in 2015 and in an attempt to reach his desired
goal, the deceased named the petitioner in suicide note to teach him a lesson.
Learned counsel also contends that daughter-in-law of the petitioner i.e.
Bindiya Devi is a victim of child abuse and molestation at the hands of
deceased, who was first molested when she was just 15 years of age and that
she was molested on multiple occasions by blackmailing her.
10.2 Learned counsel further contends that petitioner is bed ridden,
unable to communicate or perform his daily pursuits; that he is dependent upon
medicines; that offence under Section 306 of the IPC is not made out in any
way and that he is ready to join the investigation.
Contentions on behalf of petitioner Pankaj (CRM-M-554-2024):
11. Petitioner Pankaj is the son of Ishwar Dayal Ranga and the
husband of Smt. Bindiya Devi. He has raised almost the same contentions as
have been raised by his wife Bindiya Devi and father Shri Ishwar Dayal Ranga
and prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
Page N: 9 of total 15 Pages
9 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
12. Opposing all the petitions, learned State counsel contends that all
the petitioners are duly named in the FIR & the suicide note; that CD as
referred in the suicide note, on the basis of which deceased was being
blackmailed, is to be recovered and that interrogation of the petitioners is
required. Prayer is made for rejecting the petitions.
13. I have consideration submissions of both the sides and have
perused the paper-book.
14. Before proceeding further in the matter, it would be useful to refer
to the relevant provisions of law for the proper adjudication of the case.
Section 306 of the IPC reads as under:-
"306. Abetment of suicide.--If any person commits suicide, whoever abets
the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable
to fine."
Section 107 of the IPC reads as under:-
"107. Abetment of a thing.--A person abets the doing of a thing, who--
First.--Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly.--Engages with one or more other person or persons in any
conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place
in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
Thirdly.--Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that
thing."
15. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar
Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh , 2002(2) RCR (Criminal) 687 , has discussed,
as to what constitutes abetment. The relevant extract of the said judgment reads
as under;-
Page N: 10 of total 15 Pages
10 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
"13. Reverting to the facts of the case, both the courts below have erroneously
accepted the prosecution story that the suicide by the deceased is the direct
result of the quarrel that had taken place on 25th July, 1998 wherein it is
alleged that the appellant had used abusive language and had reportedly told
the deceased 'to go and die'. For this, the courts relied on a statement of Shashi
Bhushan, brother of the deceased, made under Section 161 Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 when reportedly the deceased, after coming back from
the house of the appellant, told him that the appellant had humiliated him and
abused him with filthy words. The statement of Shashi Bhushan, recorded
under Section 161 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is annexed as Annexure P -
3 to this appeal and going through the statement, we find that he has not stated
that the deceased had told him that the appellant had asked him 'to go and die'.
Even if we accept the prosecution story that the appellant did tell the deceased
'to go and die', that itself does not constitute the ingredient of 'instigation'. The
word 'instigate' denotes incitement or urging to do some drastic or inadvisable
action or to stimulate or incite. Presence of mens rea, therefore, is the
necessary concomitant of instigation. It is common knowledge that the words
uttered in a quarrel or in a spur of the moment cannot be taken to be uttered
with mens rea. It is in a fit of anger and emotional. Secondly, the alleged
abusive words, said to have been told to the deceased were on 25th July, 1998
ensued by quarrel. The deceased was found hanging on 27th July, 1998.
Assuming that the deceased had taken the abusive language seriously, he had
enough time in between on think over and reflect and, therefore, it cannot be
said that the abusive language, which had been used by the appellant on 25th
July, 1998 derived the deceased to commit suicide. Suicide by the deceased on
27th July, 1998 is not proximate to the abusive language uttered by the
appellant on 25th July, 1998. The fact that the deceased committed suicide on
27th July, 1998 would itself clearly point out that it is not the direct result of
the quarrel taken place on 25th July, 1998 when it is alleged that the appellant
had used the abusive language and also told the deceased to go and die. This
fact had escaped notice of the courts below."
[Emphasis supplied]
Thus, Hon'ble Supreme Court found that a gap of 2/3 days between the words
Page N: 11 of total 15 Pages
11 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
used and suicide showed that there was no proximate link between the
occurrence and subsequent suicide.
16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Netai Dutta vs. State of West
Bengal , 2005 AIR (SC) 1775 , has held as under:-
"5. There is absolutely no averment in the alleged suicide note that the present
appellant had caused any harm to him or was in any way responsible for delay
in paying salary to deceased Pranab Kumar Nag. It seems that the deceased
was very much dissatisfied with the working conditions at the work place.
But, it may also be noticed that the deceased after his transfer in 1999 had
never joined the office at 160 B.L. Saha Road, Kolkata and had absented
himself for a period of two years and that the suicide took place on 16.2.2001.
It cannot be said that the present appellant had in any way instigated the
deceased to commit suicide or he was responsible for the suicide of Pranab
Kumar Nag. An offence under Section 306 IPC would stand only if there is an
abetment for the commission of the crime. The parameters of the "abetment"
have been stated in Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 107 says
that a person abets the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that
thing; or engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy
for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in
pursuance of that conspiracy, or the person should have intentionally aided
any act or illegal omission. The explanation to Section 107 says that any
willful misrepresentation or willful concealment of a material fact which he is
bound to disclose, may also come within the contours of "abetment".
6. In the suicide note, except referring to the name of the appellant at two
places, there is no reference of any act or incidence whereby the appellant
herein is alleged to have committed any willful act or omission or
intentionally aided or instigated the deceased Pranab Kumar Nag in
committing the act of suicide. There is no case that the appellant has played
any part or any role in any conspiracy, which ultimately instigated or resulted
in the commission of suicide by deceased Pranab Kumar Nag.
7. Apart from the suicide note, there is no allegation made by the complainant
Page N: 12 of total 15 Pages
12 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
that the appellant herein in any way harassing his brother, Pranab Kumar Nag.
The case registered against the appellant is without any factual foundation.
The contents of the alleged suicide note do not in any way make out the
offence against the appellant. The prosecution initiated against the appellant
would only result in sheer harassment to the appellant without any fruitful
result. In our opinion, the learned Single Judge seriously erred in holding that
the First Information Report against the appellant disclosed the elements of a
cognizable offence. There was absolutely no ground to proceed against the
appellant herein. We find that this is a fit case where the extraordinary power
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to be invoked. We
quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellant and accordingly
allow the appeal."
[Emphasis supplied]
17. Thus, what is necessary to constitute an offence for abetment of
suicide is that there should be proximate live link between the occurrence and
the subsequent suicide, inasmuch as the instigation or illegal alleged omission
or commission at the hands of accused and deceased must be the only factor,
which led the deceased to commit suicide.
18. In the present case, deceased refers to a CD but there is no
mention about the contents of the CD or as to when it was prepared. He
mentions that Bindiya got sold the house of deceased to her father of
₹30,00,000/- for ₹ 13 Lacs but without mentioning as to when it happened.
Deceased mentions about spending of amount on Bindiya and her relatives but
without mentioning, as to whether he was forced to do so. To the contrary, the
language of the suicide note would reveal that deceased was utterly frustrated
on account of collapse of his extra marital affairs with petitioner Bindiya, who
Page N: 13 of total 15 Pages
13 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
had disconnected from him in the last 5-6 years, after her marriage.
19. The suicide note prima facie does not show any willful act or
omission or intentional aiding or instigating the deceased on part of any of the
petitioners in committing suicide or to have played any active part or role in
any conspiracy, which ultimately resulted in commission of suicide by the
deceased Sushil.
20. It is also important to mention that as per the contents of the FIR
lodged by the brother of the deceased, deceased Sushil was not going to work
at refinery for the last 15-20 days and when he was asked the reasons for not
going to work, he was not only blamed Bindiya Devi and her family but also
stated that he was not going to work due to some employees in refinery and
contractors. Even in the suicide note, he referred about the role of Kalyan
Upadhyay, DGM, who along with Bipul Ranjan, Shiv Shankar, Neha
Upadhyay, Durgesh Pandey had allegedly insulted him a lot and trouble him a
lot in the last 04-05 months. So much so, the deceased used abusive language
for them in the suicide note. These contents of the suicide note not only show
that deceased was frustrated due to alleged harassment by his office people for
the last 04-05 months but further show his craving for Bindiya for the last 08
years, as he was pleading her to come back to him.
21. Having regard to all the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is
highly doubtful as to whether offence under Section 306 of the IPC would be
made out, in the absence of any instigation or abetment on the part of any of
the petitioners. As such, without commenting anything further on the merits of
Page N: 14 of total 15 Pages
14 of 15
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-58885-2023 (O&M) 2024:PHHC:035466
CRM-M-64260-2023 2024:PHHC:035469
CRM-M-548-2024 2024:PHHC:035471
CRM-M-554-2024 2024:PHHC:035473
the case, all the four petitions are hereby accepted.
22. It is directed that in the event of arrest of any or all the petitioners,
they shall be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting
Officer/Investigating Officer. However, it is directed that petitioners shall join
the investigation as and when required by the IO and none of them shall
contact any person associated with the case to influence him during
investigation/trial in any manner whatsoever; nor any of them shall leave the
country without prior permission of the Court. They shall further comply with
the conditions stipulated in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Disposed of.
(DEEPAK GUPTA )
JUDGE
March 12, 2024
Neetika Tuteja
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
Page N: 15 of total 15 Pages
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035469
15 of 15
