Court allowed anticipatory bail application under S. 438 Cr.P.C. relying on Sushila Aggarwal case, quashing further inquiry without deciding ultimate merits to avoid affecting trial.
Anticipatory bail allowed on personal bond with two sureties each subject to standard bail conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10619 of 2022
Applicant :- Ajeet Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Pathak,Harshit Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Singh Bais
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Harshit Pathak, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rohit Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashok Kumar Singh Bais, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 140 of 2022, under Sections 306, 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Chilkana, District Saharanpur, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail.
As per prosecution story, the daughter of the applicants was married to deceased about five years before the date of occurrence and was living with the applicants for about two and a half years. The co-accused person Smt. Shivani, daughter of the applicants had refused to go with the deceased person and live as his wedded wife, which drove him to commit suicide.
Learned counsel for the applicants has stated that the applicants are the in-laws of the deceased person and have been falsely implicated in the present case. No allegations have been made in the FIR against them. Learned counsel has further stated that not going with her husband does not fall within the category of abetting to commit suicide. There are no other allegations against the applicants or the co-accused person of having abetted the deceased person to commit suicide. Learned counsel has further stated that the deceased person was a person having bad temper and had consumed some noxious material out of his own will. To buttress his argument, learned counsel has placed much reliance upon the statement of Dr. Ashad wherein he has stated that he was told by the sister of the deceased person that he has consumed some noxious substance and had gone from his clinic hale and hearty. Learned counsel has further stated that the deceased had not told him about the reason of consuming the said noxious substance. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. In case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed, they will not misuse the liberty and
shall cooperate with trial.
On the other hand, Sri Rohit Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashok Kumar Singh Bais, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that the daughter of the applicants was not ready to live with the deceased person and when she refused, he has consumed some poisonous substance out of anger as such.
On due consideration to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of "Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98", the applicants are entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.
Without expressing any opinion upon ultimate merits of the case either ways which may be adversely affect the trial of the case, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed .
In the event of arrest of the applicants, Ajeet Singh and Smt. Maya involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:-
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the
applicants.
It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicants shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 14.11.2022 Siddhant
Digitally signed by SIDDHANT SAHU Date: 2022.11.14 17:17:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of abetting suicide.
Whether the refusal of the applicant's daughter to cohabit with the deceased constituted abetment to suicide.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Relied on¶11
Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC online SC 98 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajeet Singh And Another
State of U.P.
Krishan Pahal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
