IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MANISHA BATRA, J.
Deepak & Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M NO. 59835 of 2023
Decided On : 24-01-2024
JUDGMENT
Mrs. Manisha Batra, J.
The present petition under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioners seeking anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.150, dated 29.08.2023, registered under Sections 306 and 34 of IPC, at Police Station City Jalalabad, District Fazilka.
2. The facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that on 29.08.2023 on receipt of an information regarding the death of one Pooja Rani wife of Birbal due to consumption of some poisonous substance and her dead body being kept at New Life Medicity Multi-speciality Hospital, Bathinda, a police party reached there, wherein the statement of complainant Rahul Kumar, brother of the victim Pooja Rani was recorded, who alleged that she was married with Birbal about 14-15 years back. They have four children. He further alleged that the present petitioners who are husband of sister-in-law and sister-in-law respectively of the deceased along with mother-in-law of the victim used to quarrel with her. On 28.08.2023 at around 9:30 AM on receipt of a call from her sister that the petitioners and her mother-in-law were quarrelling with her and she was deeply hurt due to their behaviour, he advised her to remain quiet. However, on the same evening, he received a call from the husband of her sister that she had consumed some poisonous substance and was in a critical condition. He alleged that the petitioners who are husband of sister-in-law and sister-in-law respectively of the deceased along with her mother-in-law had abetted the death of his sister. After registration of FIR under Section 306 of IPC, investigation proceedings were being initiated which are going on.
3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners on the grounds that they have been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of vague, false and concocted allegations. They had no role in abetting the suicide of the victim. Infact, they got married in the year 2013 and had been living in Bathinda thereafter. It was only on the beginning of year 2022 that they had shifted to Jalalabad. They were living separately from the victim and her husband and had no interference whatsoever in their lives. No suicide note had been left by the victim and the FIR had been lodged only to exert pressure upon them.
4. It will be relevant to mention here that the petitioners were directed to join the investigation vide order dated 12.12.2023. Learned State counsel has submitted that they have joined the investigation. It is, further, submitted in the status report and learned State counsel has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioners.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record carefully.
6. The victim Pooja Rani is alleged to have consumed some poisonous substance on 28.08.2023 and due to the impact of the same, she had died on 29.08.2023. As per the allegations, the present petitioners who are husband of sister-in-law and sister-in-law respectively of the deceased along with her mother-in-law used to quarrel with the victim and as on 28.08.2023 also they had quarrelled with her which fact had been intimated to the complainant by the victim on phone and on the same day, she had consumed a poisonous substance. The petitioners have since joined investigation. Their custodial interrogation is not required. No doubt, an accused does not become entitled to be given benefit of pre-arrest bail only due to the reason that his/her custodial interrogation is not required. However, keeping in view the allegations which have levelled against the petitioners to the effect that they used to quarrel with the victim, it has to be seen as to whether the allegations even if taken to be true on the face of record amount to making any abetment to commit suicide by the petitioners. In my considered opinion, there is nothing on record at this stage to show prima facie that there was any insti
For abetment of suicide, mere quarrels or angry words do not constitute instigation unless there is clear intention to aid or conspire in the act.
Anticipatory bail can be granted when there are insufficient specific allegations connecting the petitioner to the abetment of suicide, and if custodial interrogation is not required.
The necessity of mens rea for instigation and the requirement of concrete evidence for establishing the offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC.
The necessary ingredients contemplated under Section 107 IPC for abetment to suicide were satisfied, leading to the dismissal of the anticipatory bail petitions.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.