Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Ms. Jyoti Soni vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:306) on 3 January, 2024
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2024:RJ-JD:306]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12518/2023
Ms. Jyoti Soni D/o Sh. Ashok Kumar, Aged About 26 Years, B/c
Soni R/o Ward No. 34 Outer Signal Kumharo-Ka-Mohalla
Loonkaransar Dist. Bikaner Raj.
(Presently Lodged In Dist. Jail Barmer)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, through PP
2. Saurabh Jhakhar S/o Sh. Prem Kumar, B/c Jat R/o Vill.
Loonkaransar Dist. Bikaner Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Pradeep Shah.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Shrawan Kumar, P.P.
For Complainant(s) : Mr.Siddharth Karwasra.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
ORDER
03/01/2024
This application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been
filed by the petitioner who has been arrested in connection with
FIR No.141/2022 registered at Police Station Barmer Gramin,
Barmer, for offence under Section 306 IPC.
As per prosecution, the deceased Devi Lal Jakhar committed
suicide by hanging himself. Drawing attention of the Court towards
charge-sheet submitted by the investigating agency before
competent criminal court on 21.11.2023, learned counsel
submitted that as per prosecution, the petitioner used to lay
stress and pressure upon the deceased to give cash amount to her
which he kept on giving. As per prosecution, the petitioner was
blackmailing the deceased and threatening him to involve him in
[2024:RJ-JD:306] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-12518/2023]
criminal cases in case her demands are not fulfilled. As per
prosecution, the deceased committed suicide by hanging due to
mental agony and torturous behaviour of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that admittedly,
no criminal case/police complaint was ever filed by the deceased
against the petitioner. It was urged that bald allegations have
been levelled against the petitioner without there being any iota of
evidence available on record indicating that the petitioner by any
of her actions, instigated or intentionally aided the deceased to
commit suicide.
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
[2024:RJ-JD:306] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-12518/2023]
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.
Lastly, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner 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-petitioner.
Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for
the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public
Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant. Perused the
material available on record.
Having considered the rival submissions, facts and
circumstances of the case and challan papers, this Court does not
find any material indicating positive act on the part of the accused
petitioner to aid or instigate the deceased to commit suicide. In
the prima facie opinion of this Court, in the absence of any
evidence establishing that the petitioner is guilty of the act of
instigating/abetting the deceased to commit suicide, the allegation
of abetment to suicide cannot be sustained. This Court also prima
facie finds that investigation against the petitioner has already
been completed; no apprehension has been shown by the Public
Prosecutor that the petitioner is in position to influence the
material witnesses of the case. Thus, without expressing any
opinion on merits/demerits of the case, this Court is inclined to
enlarge the petitioner on bail.
[2024:RJ-JD:306] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-12518/2023]
Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is
allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner- Ms. Jyoti
Soni D/o Sh. Ashok Kumar shall be enlarged on bail in
connection with FIR No.141/2022 registered at Police Station
Barmer Gramin, Barmer, provided he furnishes a personal bond in
the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to
the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for her appearance
before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and
when called upon to so.
It is however, made clear that findings recorded/observations
made above are for limited purposes of adjudication of bail
application. The trial court shall not get prejudiced by the same.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
/tarun goyal/
Sr.No.344
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
