ORDER

This first Criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of bail on behalf of the appellant is arising out of order dated 09.11.2023 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Khandwa in connection with F.I.R./Crime No.376/2023 registered at Police Station Piplod Khandwa District Khandwa for the offences punishable under Section 305 of IPC, Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 67-b of the Information Technology (Amended) Act. The appellant is in custody since 15.09.2023.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the present case, the appellant has been implicated without even appreciating the aspect that the provisions of Section 305 of IPC had no applicability to the facts of the case. It is contended by the counsel that in the present case, as per the allegation levelled by the prosecution, deceased committed suicide on 29.08.2023 and later on, a mobile phone which was owned by her father got inspected and upon inspection, it was found that the deceased had opened an Instagram account in the mobile and there was a chat with the appellant in the mobile and the appellant was using his Instagram account with the name of “Om Baba Mani Maharaj.” It is contended by the counsel that apparently the deceased did not own any mobile phone. The mobile phone was of her father. According to prosecution, the last chat which was available in the phone was dated 11.08.2023. It is contended by the counsel that the appellant was arrested on 15.09.2023. It is also submission of the counsel that there is a futile attempt on the part of the prosecution to create a nexus between the chat and the ultimate suicide committed by the deceased. Thus, it is contended by the counsel that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail inasmuch as, none of the ingredients of Section 305 of IPC are attracted in the present case.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Gangula Mohan Reddy vs. State of Andra Pradesh (2010 1 SCC 50) and in the case of Ude Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana (2019 17 SCC 301) and in the case of Geo Varghese vs. The State of Rajasthan and Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.1164/2021).

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has also placed reliance on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Tejas Pomraj Parihar vs. The State of Maharashtra (B.A. No.2537/2021).

5. Therefore, the counsel contends that as there was no instigation at the behest of the appellant, his implication as regards commission of offence is ill founded and he deserves to be, enlarged on bail.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer and contends that the deceased was a minor girl and was a student of Class 11. The deceased was aged about 16 years. The present appellant as well as deceased were neighbour. The present appellant was teasing the deceased and the deceased had made complaint to her parents as well but, still the appellant did not mend his ways and kept on troubling the deceased which is palpable from the transcript of the chat of the appellant as well as deceased in Instagram account. It is contended by the counsel that the chat itself reflects that there was a threat as well to the deceased as the appellant wrote on chat that "her days were coming to an end."

7. Learned counsel for the Objector has also supported the argument of the counsel for the State. It is contended by the counsel for the objector that there is a statement of sister of the deceased as well and the same reflects that the appellant only instigated the deceased to commit the suicide. Accordingly, the counsel submits that the application deserves to be dismissed.

8. Heard the submissions and perused the record.

9. In the present case, the present appellant has been implicated on account of registration of FIR against the