The Delhi High Court refused an anticipatory bail application, holding that the applicant prima facie instigated and abetted the victim to commit suicide on the basis of her sarcastic response and failure to dissuade him during a suicide threat.
Application for anticipatory bail 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.
Nalawade A.S. 1 /4 10-aba-225-18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 225 OF 2018
Rakhi Makhanlal Patra vs.
...Applicant.
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent.
Mr. Samir A.Vaidya for the Applicant. Mr.J.S.Lohokare, APP. for the State. Mr. B.G.Tangsali for Respondent No.1.
CORAM : A.S.GADKARI, J. DATE : 17th July, 2018
P.C.
6.2.2018 on the ground that the Investigating Officer was not
present to give instructions to the learned APP. on that date.
was having love affair with the applicant for about 6 to 7 years prior
Nalawade A.S. 2 /4 10-aba-225-18
to the date of incident. Subsequently their relations got sour and they mutually decided to part ways. Both of them thereafter decided to marry with different partners and accordingly their marriages were fixed. That, on 21.5.2017 between 11.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. the applicant and deceased were together in a hotel by name Red Chilli at Kalyan and in the same night Mr. Honey committed suicide by hanging at his residential premises. On 23.5.2017, the brother of the informant namely Mr. Nand enquired about the said incident with the applicant, upon which, she told that on 21.5.2017 she along with Mr. Honey were together upto 4.00p.m. and in the same night Mr. Honey gave her a video call on her mobile phone and informed that, he was going to commit suicide by hanging. He also showed her the knot tied to the fan, to which the applicant told Mr. Honey, to show her, that he can hang himself and thereafter Mr. Honey committed suicide. It is the further prosecution case that the applicant used to harass Mr. Honey for money and also used to threatened him if he does not pay money he will be defamed. It is the prosecution case that since the break up of relations of Mr. Honey with the applicant he was continuously under depression. It is alleged that the applicant has instigated and abetted Mr. Honey to
Nalawade A.S. 3 /4 10-aba-225-18
commit suicide.
Nalawade A.S. 4 /4 10-aba-225-18
instead of dissuading Mr. Honey from committing the said act, laughed at him and in fact instigated him by saying that he should bring the said threat in reality. It appears that the said sarcastic laugh of the applicant along with her instigation to the deceased Mr. Honey to bring his alleged threat into reality has ultimately resulted in the loss of life of Mr. Honey. In view of this Court the said instigation and/or abetment of the applicant ultimately resulted into Mr. Honey committing suicide by hanging. If the applicant was not having any intention in abetting and/or instigating the deceased to commit suicide, as a person of common prudence she would have certainly made an attempt to dissuade the deceased from committing the said act. Thus, prima facie it is clear that the applicant has instigated and abetted the deceased to commit suicide.
(A.S.GADKARI, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant instigated or abetted the deceased to commit suicide warranting refusal of anticipatory bail.
Whether the applicant deserved protection under Section 438 CrPC based on the prima facie evidence of abetment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gangula Mohan Reddy vs. State of Andhra PradeshDistinguished¶21
Gangula Mohan Reddy vs. State of Andhara Pradesh reported in (2010) 1 SCC 750 · Who else cites this
Rakhi Makhanlal Patra
State of Maharashtra
A.S. Gadkari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
