Allowed

Vani Shailaja Masade v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Dec 2021CRLP/7576/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused of abetting suicide under Section 306 IPC. Holding that omnibus allegations and disputes over property without positive acts do not sustain conviction for abetment, the Court directed surrender within one week.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; direction to surrender within one week subject to personal bonds of Rs.20,000 each with two sureties.

Vani Shailaja Masade Vs The State of Telangana — Anticipatory Bail | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7576 OF 2021

¶2

ORDER:-

¶3

This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioners/A.3 to A.8 in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.28 of 2021 of Asifabad Police Station, Komaram Bheem Asifabad District, registered for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶4

A report was lodged by the brother of the deceased stating that her sister’s marriage was performed with one M.Balawant Rao on 18.11.2005 and they blessed with two female children. The family members of her sister harassed her mentally pertaining to property issue, due to which, his sister consumed poison on 14.01.2021 at about 8.30 p.m. and while undergoing treatment, on 18.01.2021 at about 11.24 p.m., she died. Basing on the complaint of the brother of the deceased, police registered the present case.

¶5

Heard Mr.Allam Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits petitioner No.1 is cosister and petitioner Nos.2 to 6 are the sisters-in-law of the deceased. He submits that even as per the allegations in the complaint, there are no specific overt acts against these petitioners, only omnibus allegations are

¶7

LK, J

¶8

¶9

made. There are disputes with regard to the property and the deceased committed suicide. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioners are instigated or abetted the deceased to commit suicide. He submits that Section 306 IPC has no application to the facts of the case. Further, the husband of the deceased executed a gift deed on 09.08.2021 in favour of minor children, represented by guardian/grandmother, and transferred Ac.5.0440 guntas of land. All the petitioners are residing at different places and they are nothing to do with the alleged offence. Hence, the petitioners’ case may be considered for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that investigation is going on and as there are grave allegations against the petitioners, they are not entitled for pre-arrest bail.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel on either side, it is appropriate to have a look at Section 306 I.P.C. which reads thus:

¶12

“ 306 . Abetment of suicide - if any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."

¶13

Abetment involves mental process of instigating the person or intentionally aiding the person for doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused in aiding or instigating or abetting the deceased to commit suicide, the said person cannot be compelled to face

¶14

LK, J Crl.P.No.7576 of 2021

¶15

¶16

a trial. (C riminal Application (Apl) No.547 of 2017 the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur) .

¶17

Before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 of IPC, the court must scrupulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with no other alternative, but to commit suicide. It is also to be borne in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 of IPC is not sustainable”. ( M.Mohan vs. State of Tamilnadu¹ ).

¶18

Thus, the said provision makes it clear that to constitute an offence under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution has to establish: (i) that a person committed suicide, and (ii) that such suicide was abetted by the accused. In other words, an offence under Section 306 would stand only if there is an "abetment" for the commission of the crime.

¶19

Taking into consideration the fact all the petitioners are residing at different places, admittedly there are property disputes between the parties and in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in M. Mohan

¶20

1 2011 (3) SCC 626

¶21

LK, J

¶22

Crl.P.No.7576 of 2021

¶23

¶24

supra, wherein it was held that ingredients of Section 107 IPC have to be proved to constitute offence under Section 306 IPC, this Court deems it appropriate to grant bail to the petitioners.

¶25

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. Petitioners/A.3 to A.8 shall surrender before the Station House Officer, Asifabad Police Station, Komarambheem Asifabad District, in connection with Crime No.28 of 2021 within one week from today and on such surrender and executing personal bonds for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the said Station House Officer, they shall be released on bail. It is made clear that no further extension of time will be granted.

¶26

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶27

__________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J

¶28

Date :20.12.2021

¶29

mar

Vani Shailaja Masade v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vani Shailaja Masade v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madireddy Srinivas Reddy, Vs Tejawath Tukya

G.Ashok Singh Vs The State of Telangana

Kordhala Bharath Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

P.Jayanth Vs P.Anasuya and another

G. Sri Krishna Vs The State of Telangana

G. Sri Krishna Vs The State of Telangana