Ram Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5368 Raj

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5368 Raj
Judgement Date : 26 May, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Ram Kumar vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 26 May, 2023

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2023/RJJD/017741]

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                        JODHPUR
                     S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 486/2023
Ram Kumar S/o Shri Sukhdev Suthar, Aged About 38 Years, R/o
Vill. Chirdhani Pipar Ps Dist. Jodhpur Rural At Present R/o As
Tenant Of House No. G/284 Shastri Nagar Jodhpur Dist. Jodhpur
Raj.
(Confined In Central Jail Jodhpur)
                                                                         ----Appellant
                                        Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2.       Rajkumar       Meena       S/o      Kana      Ram          Meena,   R/o    313
         Rawatbhatta Road Nearby Shiv Mandir Shyam Nagar Rk
         Puram Ps Kota City Dist. Kota
                                                                      ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)              :    Mr.Tirath Raj Singh Sodha.
For Respondent(s)             :    Mr.S.K.bhati, P.P.
For Complainant               :    Mr.Tarun Dhaka.


         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
                        JUDGMENT

26/05/2023 The instant appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has

been filed by the appellant against the order dated 26.4.2023

passed by learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Jodhpur Metro in Cr.

Case No.148/2023, whereby the bail application filed by the

appellant, who has been arrested in connection with FIR

No.95/2023 registered at Police Station Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, for

offences under Sections 302, 201/34 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(v)

of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, has been rejected.

[2023/RJJD/017741] (2 of 4) [CRLAS-486/2023]

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the

appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned

counsel submitted that the deceased was in live-in relationship

with the present appellant. Leaned counsel submitted that on

14.4.2023, the deceased committed suicide by consuming

sleeping pills and injection in excessive quantity. According to

learned counsel, the allegation against the appellant is that with a

view to develop sexual relations with the deceased, he concealed

from the deceased the factum of being a married man. Owing to

aforesaid, deceased started quarreling with appellant.

Learned counsel submitted that though FIR lodged against

the appellant under Section 302, IPC read with Section 3(2)(v) of

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act 1989, but the investigating agency after conducting thorough

investigation into the matter, has filed challan against him under

Section 306 IPC.

Taking into consideration aforesaid argument, this Court vide

order dated 24.5.2023 directed learned Public Prosecutor to keep

the Investigating Officer present before the Court alongwith case

diary. Though, the Investigating Officer is not present before the

Court today, however learned Public Prosecutor under instructions

submitted that the investigation against the appellant has already

been culminated and investigating agency is filing challan against

him under Section 306 IPC before competent criminal court.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that from the

perusal of the FIR, it is evident that there is no evidence available

on record to suggest that the appellant is guilty of the act of

[2023/RJJD/017741] (3 of 4) [CRLAS-486/2023]

instigation of the act of suicide. Learned counsel submitted that

the appellant is in judicial custody, challan has been filed and the

trial of the case will take sufficiently long time, therefore, the

benefit of bail should be granted to the accused-appellant.

Learned counsel relied upon the judgment rendered by

Hon'ble the Apex court in M. Arjuna vs. State, represented by

its Inspector of Police, reported in (2019) 3 SCC 315, wherein

the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:-

"The essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. are: (i) the abetment, (ii) the intention of the accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide. The act of the accused, however, insulting the deceased by using abusive language will not, by itself, constitute the abetment of suicide. There should be evidence capable of suggesting that the accused intended by such act to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. Unless the ingredients of instigation/abetment to commit suicide are satisfied, accused cannot be convicted under Section 306 I.P.C."

Learned counsel further also relied upon the judgment

rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of S.S.

Cheena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan & Anr. reported in

(2010)12 SCC 190, wherein Hon'ble the Supreme Court while

deciding a criminal appeal held that abetment involves a mental

process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in

doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused

to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be

sustained.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the appeal.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public

Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.