Serious allegations of harassment leading to suicide can justify denial of anticipatory bail; the court must balance individual rights against societal interests.

JUDGMENT :

SUMEET GOEL, J.

1. Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of anticipatory/pre-arrest bail under Sections 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘ BNS S ’) in FIR No.18 dated 17.03.2025 registered for offences punishable under Section 108 of the , 2023 and Section 107 of , 2023 (added later on) at Police Station Bariwala, District Sri Muktsar Sahib.

2. The gravamen of the FIR pertains to an incident in which the complainant namely Karanveer Kaur, wife of Gurlal Singh, resident of Marahak, District Faridkot (wife and mother of the deceased) stated that on the alleged day of occurrence her husband Gurlal Singh and her son namely Baljodh Singh, went on his motorcycle to fetch milk but did not return home. Later the complainant was informed that both had jumped into the Rajasthan Feeder Canal near village Warring Wali Jorrian. Their motorcycle and mobile phone were found at the roadside of the said canal. She alleged that her father-in-law namely Jagroop Singh had repaid loan(s) taken from Tarsem Singh s/o Gurditta Singh (Numberdar), Suba Singh S/o Kattar Singh, Manpreet Singh @ Meeta s/o Darshan Singh, Badal Singh s/o Harbhajan Singh, Kiran Pal Singh s/o Joginder Singh (petitioner herein), Bhag Singh s/o Gurdial Singh, Mukand Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh, Jang Singh s/o Gurbachan Singh, Jagsir Singh s/o Angrej Singh, Sikander Singh s/o Chand Singh, all residents of Marhak and Gupi Suresh & Sons (Commission Agents), residents of Jaito. She alleged that even after repayment, the aforesaid persons continuously harassed her husband, demanding money and abusing him in our house. It was further alleged that after the death of father-in-law of the complainant about four years ago, the aforesaid persons used to abuse the husband of the complainant by coming to the house. The complainant alleged that due to the persistent pressure and humiliation, her husband Gurlal Singh and her son were compelled to end their lives by committing suicide. On these set of allegations, instant FIR was registered and investigation ensued.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has iterated that present FIR has been registered against 11 accused persons, including the petitioner, on identical allegations that loans were advanced to Jagroop Singh – father of the deceased - Gurlal Singh. Learned senior counsel has further iterated that after the death of said Jagroop Singh, some of the accused, including the petitioner, filed civil recovery suits for their dues. Learned senior counsel has further submitted that the petitioner has advanced a loan of Rs.2,85,000/- to father of the deceased namely Jagroop Singh and his real brother Lachman Singh on the basis of pronote and receipt date 04.03.2020 duly scribed by a registered deed writer at Jaito. However, on default of repayment, the petitioner instituted a recovery suit on 06.08.2021 (copy whereof is appended as Annexure P-2). Learned counsel asserts that all the persons named in the FIR are creditors from whom the deceased and his father has borrowed money and they were pursuing their legitimate claims through due process of law by filing recovery suits. According to learned counsel, the unfortunate suicide of Gurlal Singh and his son has caused loss not only to their own family but also to the petitioner and other creditors and hence the petitioner has gained nothing from their death. Furthermore, the impugned FIR also refers to a video allegedly recorded by the deceased before committing suicide wherein he named several persons, including his own wife and even stated that she would be happy after his death which shows that the allegations ar