This judgment considers an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding charges of abetting suicide. The court examined the allegations of continuous torture and instigation, cited relevant Supreme Court precedents, and ultimately rejected the application.
Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. rejected.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:233467
Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 12814 of 2023
Applicant :- Mithlesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sadrul Islam Jafri,Ambreen Masroor,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Agrawal
Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.
bua used to provoke his mother to consume poison and they also used to beat her and when one night they made a quarrel with his mother, she committed suicide by consuming some poison in the glass. She was taken to the hospital, but after some time brought back to the home. It is also submitted that even if co-accused Suryakant had some extra-marital affairs, it was not sufficient to hold him responsible for the suicide committed by his wife. In support of his contention, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P., 2002 3 SCR 668 wherein in almost similar circumstances the Hon'ble Supreme Court had quashed the chargesheet for an offence under section 306 IPC. It is also submitted that the present applicant along with co-accused Suryakant had preferred Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No.8308 of 2023, which was dismissed with a liberty to the petitioners to apply for anticipatory bail before the competent court according to law vide order dated 5.7.2023. It is also submitted that that the regular bail application moved by co-accused Pop Singh, the father-in-law of the deceased, was rejected by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.23628 of 2023 vide order dated 31.5.2023. It is also submitted that the present applicant, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased, was not present at the place of occurrence at the time of incident, as she was at her parents' place. It is also submitted that the story of the F.I.R. that the deceased was assaulted by her in-laws before her death is also false because the postmortem report does not corroborate the same and no antemortem injury has been found over the body of the deceased. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents to her credit and in case she is granted anticipatory bail, she will not misuse the liberty and will cooperate with the investigation.
morning. It is also submitted that although she was taken to the hospital by her in-laws, but no treatment was offered there to her and they immediately took her back to home and the cctv footage sufficiently shows that at that time, the present applicant was very well present with the deceased. It is also submitted that in the FSL Report, Organochloro Insecticide poison has been found in the viscera of the deceased.
"16.1 For the purpose of finding out if a person has abetted commission of suicide by another, the consideration would be if the accused is guilty of the act of instigation of the act of suicide. As explained and reiterated by this Court in the decisions abovereferred, instigation means to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. If the persons who committed suicide had been hypersensitive and the action of accused is otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be safe to hold the accused guilty of abetment of suicide. But, on the other hand, if the accused by his acts and by his continuous course of conduct creates a situation which leads the deceased perceiving no other option except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the four-corners of Section 306 IPC.............................However, if the accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words or deeds until the deceased reacted or was provoked, a particular case may be that of abetment of suicide."
generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.
Order Date :- 6.12.2023 ss
Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant accused of abetting suicide under Section 306 IPC.
Whether the applicant played a role in instigating the deceased to commit suicide.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P.Distinguished
Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P., 2002 3 SCR 668 · Who else cites this
Ude Singh and Others Versus State of HaryanaRelied on¶14
Ude Singh and Others Versus State of Haryana, (2019) 17 Supreme Court Cases 301
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi)Relied on¶17
Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mithlesh
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
