SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Guj) 453

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A. S. SUPEHIA, J.
SANJAY KANAKMAL AGRAWAL - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 10560 of 2020
With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 10573 of 2020
With
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 10761 of 2020
Decided On : 16-07-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :MR N.D. NANAVATY, SENIOR ADVOCATE, with MR. BHADRISH S RAJU with NIMIT Y SHUKLA
For the Respondent: MR.MOXA THAKKER, APP, MR.HIMANSHU K PATEL, APP, MR.VISHAL J DAVE

Point of law :Abatement of suicide -sole incident cannot fall within the parameters of section 107 of the I.P.C, and the deceased was not left with any other option but to end her life.;

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code 1860-Section 306,114- Criminal Procedure Code 1973-Section 438-Abetment of suicide-Abettor present when offence is committed-Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest- Prayer for bail - Deceased was an employee of the firm of the applicants and vide Employment Letter-she was employed with specific conditions as mentioned therein- The letter of the employment of the deceased specifically stated that she was not supposed to engage herself in any company or sister concern or with their clients, for any work, profession or employment either honorary or otherwise during the period of employment- when it came to the knowledge of the applicants that the deceased was working with one Shreeji Company, she was accordingly informed that she cannot do so without taking any permission or instruction

from the firm-

Finding of the Court:

such allegations or altercations between the applicant no.1 and the deceased even if are taken on its face value, the same would not satisfy the requirement of provisions of Section 306 read with Section 107 of the IPC- There was no mens rea or instigation on behalf of the applicants-which are essential ingredients to establish offence of Section 306- custodial interrogation of the applicants at this stage is not necessary- Applicants will keep themselves available during the course of investigation, as well as in the trial also and will not flee from justice- Applicants are ready and willing to abide by all the conditions, including imposition of conditions with regard to powers of investigating agency to file an application before the competent Court for his remand-

, No material has come on record which would suggest that the deceased was harassed mentally or physically by the accused. Thus, prima facie it appears that case of prosecution rests on the sole incident of 23.06.2020- Without discussing the evidence in detail, at this stage-The court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants- At the trial, the concerned trial court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order- The applications are allowed in the aforesaid terms-RULE is made absolute to the aforesaid extent-Direction Issued-Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the concerned authority / court through Fax message, email and/or any other suitable electronic mode-

Result: Application is allowed

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties by video conferencing.

2. By way of the present applications filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants-accused have prayed for bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.I- 11210008200908 of 2020 registered with Sarthana Police Station, Surat City, District Surat for the offences under Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. (IPC)

3. The facts narrated in the FIR are that the daughter of the first informant namely, Panchilla, aged bout 26 years used to work as CA in Agrawal and Dhandhania Chartered Accountants Firm since last one and half years. The present applicants are the partners of the Agrawal and Dhandhania CA firm. It is alleged that on 30.06.2020, the daughter of the first informant had committed suicide by hanging due to harassment meted out by the applicants. It is further stated that on 23.06.2020, the deceased had gone to attend a religious function arraigned by one Shri Rajeshbhai Jivanbhai Sundani in Shreeji Yarn, who is one of the clients of the applicants firm, on invitation and the applicant - Sanjay Agarwal, who was also the invitee, arrived at the function and on seeking the deceased at the function scolded and defamed her by blaming that she was doing job with Shreeji Yarn, and he threatened the deceased to drag her to court as well as to get her CA’s license rejected due to which, the deceased went into depression and resigned from her job and sent her resignation through e-mail. It is further alleged that because of such harassment by the applicants, the deceased had committed suicide on 30.06.2020.

4. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.N.D.Nanavaty with learned advocate Mr.Bhadrish Raju with learned advocate Mr.Nimit Y. Shukla appearing on behalf of the applicants have submitted that the deceased was an employee of the firm of the applicants and vide Employment Letter dated 20.09.2018 she was employed with specific conditions as mentioned therein. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Nanavaty, while referring to the Condition Nos.5 and 13, has submitted that the letter of the employment of the deceased specifically stated that she was not supposed to engage herself in any company or sister concern or with their clients, for any work, profession or employment either honorary or otherwise during the period of employment. He has further submitted that when it came to the knowledge of the applicants that the deceased was working with one Shreeji Company, she was accordingly informed that she cannot do so without taking any permission or instruction from the firm. It is submitted by Mr.Nanavaty that on being informed by her engagement with another firm, she had immediately tendered her resignation, through email. It is submitted that as per the contents of the FIR as well as facts narrated by the Investigating Officer in his report, it appears that the accused no.1- Sanjay Agarwal has attended function on 23.06.2020 organized by Shri Rajeshbhai Jivanbhai Sundani - proprietor of Shreeji Yarn, and the deceased was also present and there appears to be some altercation with her engagement in Shreeji Firm and it appears that the deceased was allegedly warned by accused - Sanjay Agarwal of taking legal action against her as, she was doing the work with the firm of Rajeshbhai Jivanbhai Sadani without taking permission or informing the firm of the applicant no.1.

4.1 Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Nanavaty has submitted that such allegations or altercations between the applicant no.1 and the deceased even if are taken on its face value, the same would not satisfy the requirement of provisions of Section 306 read with Section 107 of the IPC and it cannot be said that there was any instigation or abetment by the applicants, which has driven the deceased to commit suicide. It is further submitted that there was no mens rea or instigation on behalf of the applicants, which are essential ingredients to establish offence of Sec

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top