Gujarat High Court
Harsh Nileshbhai Prajapati vs State Of Gujarat on 9 February, 2022
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/19351/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19351 of 2021
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19407 of 2021
With
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19411 of 2021
==========================================================
HARSH NILESHBHAI PRAJAPATI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS MEENA VYAS(3315) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR BOMI H SETHNA(5864) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 09/02/2022
COMMON ORAL ORDER
1. All the aforesaid applications are arising out of the same FIR and therefore, all the applications have been disposed of by this common order.
2. By way of the present applications under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants-accused have prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11191045211640 of 2021 registered with Sola High Court Police Station, District: Ahmedabad City for the offences under Sections 306, 323, 498(A), 294(b), 504 and 114 of IPC.
3. Brief facts leading to filing of the present applications are as under:
3.1 The complainant is the brother of the deceased Ilaben who Page 1 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 10 21:02:39 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19351/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022 has committed suicide on 05.10.2021 by hanging herself at her matrimonial home. The marriage span was of 13 years. It was second marriage of both the parties. The applicants are stepson aged about 20 years old, father-in-law and mother-in-
law of the deceased. It is alleged against the present applicants and husband of the deceased that deceased was subjected to cruelty by the applicants, as a result of which, she committed suicide. It is further alleged in the FIR that after one month of marriage, the husband started harassing the deceased by way of mental and physical torture and he always suspected her character. It is alleged against father-in- law and mother-in-law that whenever deceased complained about harassment meted out to her by the husband, instead of giving protection to her, they always said that you have to bear with the alleged acts and deeds committed by the husband and used filthy language. It is alleged that before two years of the incident, she was beaten by the husband for which she had to take treatment at Civil Hospital, Vadodara and due to intervention of family members, she did not file any complaint. It is also alleged that stepson never accepted the deceased and also used to beat her. In this background facts, it is alleged that the applicants herein intentionally aids, and instigate the deceased, as a result of which, she committed suicide by hanging herself.
4. This Court has heard Ms. Meena Vyas, learned advocate for the applicants, Mr. Bomi Sethna, learned advocate for the original complainant and Mr. Manan Maheta, learned APP for the respondent-State.
5. Ms. Meena Vyas, learned advocate for the applicants reiterating the grounds raised in the present applications contended that there is no prima-facie evidence for the Page 2 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 10 21:02:39 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19351/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022 alleged abetment against the applicants. She further submitted that the offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of IPC has twin essential ingredients (i) a person commits suicide, (ii) such suicide shall have to be abeted by the accused. In this context, she submitted that the offence of suicide involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Thus, to hold a person liable for abeting suicide, the prosecution has to establish two roles, which can be described instigating or aiding in doing thing. That the applicant stepson namely Harsh aged about 20 years old pursuing his Diploma in Computer Engineering with Silver Oak College, Ahmedabad and at the relevant point of time, he was not present at the place. That the father-in-law aged about 73 years old, suffering from disease of dementia and also suffering from the disease of memory disturbance, whereas the mother-in-law is also suffering from old age ailments. That the allegations are general in nature. That the applicants have cooperated with the investigation and therefore, if benefit of anticipatory bail is granted to them, then there is no any impact on investigation.
6. In view of aforesaid facts and contentions raised herein, Ms. Vyas, learned advocate for the applicants would submit that case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail and the present applications may be allowed imposing appropriate conditions.
7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail stating inter alia that the allegations against the applicants are grave and serious in nature and custodial interrogation is necessary for further investigation of the case.
8. On the other hand, Mr. Bomi Sethna, learned advocate for the Page 3 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 10 21:02:39 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19351/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022 original complainant reiterating the contents of the affidavit filed by the informant Kamleshbhai Prajapati contended that the deceased was fed up with the day to day harassment, meted out by the applicants, as a result, she ended her life by committing suicide. He would submits that before the incident, the husband had caused injuries upon the deceased for which written complaint was filed before Sola High Court Police Station. In this background, he would submits that considering the gravity of the offence and conduct of the applicants, present applications may not be entertained.
9. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, it appears that the husband namely Nileshbhai Prajapati is behind bar. The applicants are stepson, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. A bare perusal of the FIR would show that serious allegations being alleged against the husband Nileshbhai, whereas, the allegations alleged against the present applicants is to the effect that they had protected the husband. The allegations for using filthy language and harassment being made in general manner against the present applicants. So far stepson is concerned, no date or time being disclosed for the alleged act of causing injury to the deceased. In case of Velladurai vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police reported in 2021 (4) Crimes 331, the Apex Court has held that, mere harassment without any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to suicide would not amount to an offence under Section 306 of IPC. The father-in-law is suffering from dementia, whereas, the mother-in-law is also having old aged ailments. The step son is pursuing his Diploma in Computer Engineering at Ahmedabad. Therefore, Page 4 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 10 21:02:39 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19351/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022 this Court is of the considered view that without entering into merits of the case, the case is made out for anticipatory bail.
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the cases and the role attributed to the present applicants in the alleged offence, I find no reason to decline pre-arrest bail to the applicants. In the result, the present applications are allowed. The applicants are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with a FIR being C.R. No.11191045211640 of 2021 registered with Sola High Court Police Station, District: Ahmedabad City on their executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with one surety of like amount on the following conditions:
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on 17.02.2022 between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.;
(c) shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
(d) shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;
(e) shall at the time of execution of bond, furnish the address to the investigating officer and the court concerned and shall not change their residence till the final disposal of the case till further orders;
(f) shall not leave India without the permission of the Trial Court and if having passport shall deposit the same before the Trial Court within a week; and
(g) it would be open to the Investigating Officer to file an application for remand if he considers it proper and just and the learned Magistrate would decide it on merits;
11. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police Page 5 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 10 21:02:39 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19351/2021 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022 remand of the applicants. The applicants shall remain present before the learned Magistrate on the first date of hearing of such application and on all subsequent occasions, as may be directed by the learned Magistrate. This would be sufficient to treat the accused in the judicial custody for the purpose of entertaining application of the prosecution for police remand. This is, however, without prejudice to the right of the accused to seek stay against an order of remand, if, ultimately, granted, and the power of the learned Magistrate to consider such a request in accordance with law. It is clarified that the applicants, even if, remanded to the police custody, upon completion of such period of police remand, shall be set free immediately, subject to other conditions of this anticipatory bail order.
12. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
13. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) TAUSIF SAIYED Page 6 of 6 Downloaded on : Thu Feb 10 21:02:39 IST 2022