THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.6910 of 2025

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner/accused No.1, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.452 of 2024 on the file of the AJ Mills Colony Police Station, Warangal registered for the offence punishable under Section 108 r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. Heard Sri C.Sunil Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State.

3. The case of prosecution in brief is that on 04.07.2024 at about 14-00 hours the de-facto complainant lodged a complaint with the police stating that there was some quarrel with regard to the daughter of Devulapalli Damodar viz., Pallavi and keeping the grudge in mind, he had harassed her husband mentally and Md.Azam extended threats. That on 03.07.2024 her husband went away from the house and returned at 11.00 p.m., and went into his computer room and at that time she was sleeping in their bedroom along with her children. On 04.07.2024 at about 6-00 p.m. they woke up and found her husband hanged to an iron rod and died and she found suicide note near the computer, wherein it was mentioned that her husband was harassed by Devulkapalli Damodar, his wife Sharada and elder daughter Pallavi and Md.Azam, physically and mentally. Mr.Devulapalli Damodar had taken a sum of Rs.10,10,000/- from her husband at different intervals and harassing him for money and her husband unable to disclose the same, committed suicide by hanging. Devulapalli Damodar, his wife Sharada and elder daughter Pallavi are responsible for the death of her husband. Basing on the same, the present crime was registered for the aforesaid offences.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he was falsely implicated in respect of the alleged incident, which was occurred about 25 years back with regard to the property to an extent of 250 square yards and the de-facto complainant lodged the complaint against the petitioner and his wife and daughter and neighbor. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the ingredients of Section 108 of BNS are not attracted against the petitioner and the petitioner never instigated and provoked the deceased to commit suicide. The petitioner is aged about 71 years and retired RTC driver and he is not having any criminal antecedents. He further submitted that accused Nos.2 to 4 were already enlarged on bail. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and he will abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court. In support of his contentions, he relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Mohit Singhal and another vs. State of Uttarakhand and others1

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed a grave offence and there are specific allegations levelled against the petitioner to attract the ingredients of Section 108 of BNS. Especially the deceased in his suicide note specifically mentioned the role of the petitioner and the

1 (2024) 1 Supreme Court Cases 417

petitioner extracted huge amount from the deceased and when the deceased demanded for repayment of the amount, petitioner threatened the deceased and at his instigation only, the deceased committed suicide. The deceased specifically mentioned every aspect in his suicide note. The petitioner is absconding since 04.07.2024. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that basing on the complaint lodged by the de-facto complaint, who is none other than the wife of the deceased, on 04.07.2024, the present crime was re