Gujarat High Court
Nagajan Modhvadia @ Nagarjunbhai vs State Of Gujarat on 30 March, 2022
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/19721/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 19721 of 2020
================================================================
NAGAJAN MODHVADIA @ NAGARJUNBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR IH SYED, SR. ADV WITH MR SALIM M SAIYED(5172) WITH MR VIMAL
A PUROHIT(5049) for the Applicant
MR JAIMIN A MEHTA(10552) for the Respondent
MRS KRINA CALLA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 30/03/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. This application is filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking prayer of anticipatory bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11196030200868 of 2020 registered with Sayajiganj Police Station, District: Vadodara City for the offences under Sections 306, 386, 506(2) and 114 of IPC and Sections 38, 40 and 42 of Gujarat Money Laundering Act, 2011.
2. The case of the prosecution is that one Alpeshbhai Nanjibhai Patel
- husband of the complainant decided to end his life and committed suicide on 06.10.2020 in Room No.105 of Hotel Amity at Vadodara at Vadodara. The wife-complainant lodged an FIR against ten persons. The applicant herein has been arraigned as accused no.1 in the alleged FIR. The investigating agency found one suicide note at the hotel room, wherein names of ten persons as referred in the FIR were disclosed by the deceased. It reveals from the suicide note that the persons named in the FIR are harassing the deceased and he is ending his life due to said Page 1 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 13:54:20 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19721/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2022 harassment. It further reveals from the note that he had paid Rs.2 crore 41 lakh to them, however, they are pressurizing for further amount and threatened to kill him also. It is specifically mentioned in the suicide note that for his act of suicide, his partner Narendrasinh Vaghela is responsible as he earned Rs.2 crore from him and now he is not cooperating him and therefore, he left with no option but to end his life. In the aforesaid facts, the wife of the deceased lodged an FIR against the present applicant and other co-accused alleging that due to constant harassment on their part, her husband has committed suicide.
3. This Court has heard Mr. IH Syed, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Vimal Purohit, learned advocate for the applicant, Mr. Jaimin A. Mehta, learned advocate for the original complainant and Mrs. Krina Calla, learned APP for the respondent-State.
4. It is the submission of learned Senior counsel Mr. IH Syed appearing for the applicant that deceased committed suicide on 06.10.2020, before 19=08 hrs, whereas, it is alleged that the applicant herein on the date of incident went to the house of the deceased and inquired about whereabouts of the deceased and threatened and intimated the family members that if deceased is not available on call, then, he would kidnap the daughter and wife of the deceased. In this context, he urged that, when the applicant alleged to have threatened the family members at the house, the incident of suicide was already taken place, in the hotel at Vadodara and his cell phone was switched off. Therefore, even assuming for the sake of argument the allegations are to believe to be true, then also, there is no any act of instigation in the abetment of suicide on the part of the applicant herein as suicide is not directly connected with alleged act of applicant. Learned Senior Counsel further Page 2 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 13:54:20 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19721/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2022 submitted that in case of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect act of incitement to the commission of suicide and merely on the allegation of harassment without their being any positive action, proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led to commit suicide in terms of Section 306 is not sustainable in eye of law.
Learned Senior counsel Mr. Syed, on factual aspect of the case, submitted that the applicant herein has nothing to do with the cause of death of the deceased and he having no any connection whatsoever with regard to financial business of the deceased or his partner Mr. Narendrasinh Vaghela. The applicant herein implicated merely because of his contact with his business partner. Therefore, the allegations made in the FIR and contents of the suicide note do not itself amount to instigation and there is no any mens-rea which is necessary, concomitant of instigation and therefore, no prima-facie offence of instigation or abetment of suicide is made out against the applicant herein.
In the aforesaid contentions raised by Mr. Syed, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that that considering the frivolity of the prosecution, case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail and therefore, present application may be allowed.
5. Mr. Jaimin Mehta, learned advocate for the original complainant and Mrs. Krina Calla, learned APP for the respondent State, vehemently opposed the application, contending that the name of the applicant is specifically mentioned by the deceased in his suicide note and the incident happened at the home of the complainant recorded in the mobile phone and same has been recovered by the investigating officer and Page 3 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 13:54:20 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19721/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2022 therefore, the involvement of the applicant herein for the alleged offence is clearly made out. It was submitted that to unearth the modus of alleged crime, custodial interrogation of applicant is utmost necessary. Therefore, considering the role attributed in the alleged offence, seriousness of the offence, no case is made out for granting anticipatory bail.
6. The applicant herein has been charged with Sections 306, 386 and 502 of IPC. In order to bring the case within provisions of Section 306 of IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in commission of said act, the person who is said to have abetted commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigating or by doing a certain act to facilitate commission of suicide. Recently in the case of Velladurai vs State Represented by the Inspector of Police reported in 2021 (4) Crimes 331, it is observed by the Supreme Court that mere harassment without any positive action on the part of the accused proximate to the time of occurrence which led to the suicide would not amount to an offence under Section 306 of IPC.
7. In light of the settled law propounded by Apex Court and applying to the facts of the present case, it appears that the deceased was in business of finance with accused no.3 - Narendrasinh Vaghela who happen to be his partner. The informant - wife of the deceased disclosed the facts in the FIR that deceased was in depression as he had borrowed huge amount from the market. It is no doubt true that the name of the applicant herein has been referred in the suicide note as well as in the FIR. It is alleged that on the date of incident, he threatened the family members of the deceased as he wanted to talk with the deceased for his money lent to the deceased. It is to be noted that in the matter of suicide, on account of financial crises, more particularly, when the debtor is Page 4 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 13:54:20 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19721/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2022 unable to repay the money to the creditors, in such cases, in absence of sufficient material, it is not possible to infer the act of instigation or aiding to the suicide committed by the deceased. In the facts of present case, only allegation of harassment being alleged in the suicide note, without specifying the necessary details of transaction. A bare reading of the FIR would show that when applicant alleged to have took visit at the house of the deceased, the deceased, had already committed suicide and his cell phone was switched off. In these circumstances, this Court is prima-facie view that the act of applicant taking visit house of the deceased, having no any direct bearing on the suicide committed by the deceased as before the alleged incident of threatening the deceased had committed suicide. It is undisputed fact that since 05.10.2020, deceased was not responding on his cell phone.
8. In the foregoing reasons, as there is no any past antecedents of like nature against the present applicant and pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the applicant remained present before the investigating officer and the investigation is almost completed and therefore, custodial interrogation of the present applicant is not necessary. Thus, without expressing anything on merits of the case and considering the role attributed to the present applicant in the alleged offence, I find no reason to decline pre-arrest bail to the applicant. In the result, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with a FIR being C.R. No.11196030200868 of 2020 registered with Sayajiganj Police Station, District: Vadodara City on his executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of like amount on the following conditions:
Page 5 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 13:54:20 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19721/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2022
(a) shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself
available for interrogation whenever required;
(b) shall remain present at concerned Police Station on
11.04.2022 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 his 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;
9. Despite this order, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to apply to the competent Magistrate, for police remand of the applicant. The applicant 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 Page 6 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 13:54:20 IST 2022 R/CR.MA/19721/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/03/2022 clarified that the applicant, 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.
10. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
11. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) P.S. JOSHI Page 7 of 7 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 13:54:20 IST 2022