Ponnam Nagaraju vs The State Of Telangana

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’), seeking the relief of pre-arrest bail.

The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 in Crime No.340 of 2026 on the file of the Sathupalli Police Station, Khammam District, facing accusation under Section 108 of the Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

Heard Mr. T. Jayant Jaisoorya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent - State.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the father of the de-facto complainant had approached the petitioner’s Company for finance, wherein the petitioner was the Manager for repairs of his lorry bearing Registration No. AP 26 TD 9659. Thereafter, the lorry was sold to another person and while transferring the rights, when he went to the office of the petitioner, they are said to have stated, “You are unable to pay the EMIs on the lorry property, and now you are selling it.” They further informed him that the insurance relating to his lorry was in the name of the de-facto complainant’s mother, whereupon the deceased is said to have asked him, “When I am the registered owner of the lorry, how can the insurance be in the name of my wife?” The petitioner is said to have responded that, “If you die, the insurance is claim on you”. On the same day, deceased came home and consumed poison in his house, on knowing he was shifted to hospital for treatment for treatment. While undergoing treatment he succumbed on 17.08.2026. Basing on the report, the crime came to be registered.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation, even at its face value, will not qualify the requirements of Section 108 of BNS, in particular Section 45 of BNS, inasmuch as the deceased was admittedly dealing with the Company, except on 10.08.2026, the date of occurrence. There are no other allegations whatsoever against the petitioner or any other person. He further pointed out that, from the date the deceased was admitted into the hospital, i.e., on 10.08.2026, till his death, i.e., on 17.08.2026, there was no statement, much less a dying declaration, recorded, and no specific allegation against the petitioner was said to have been made by the deceased. He further pleaded that the statement attributed to the petitioner, even if admitted, was a casual consequence of a normal and ordinary business conversation, without any intention or excitement, and cannot be held to constitute criminal abetment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that in the Hon’ble Apex Court when the case dealing with Abhinav Mohan Delkar Vs. State of Maharashtra^{11.(2026) 6 Supreme Court Cases 233}, having considered the settled legal position, reported that the rebuttal to goad a person in distress cannot, by itself, constitute the ingredients of the offence of abetment of suicide. Considering the facts therein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court quashed the proceedings. However, the petitioner is willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Hence, it is prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and stated that the statement recorded during the investigation specifically referred to the petitioner and that the petitioner made a comment as to the applicability of the insurance policy to the petitioner when he died. This aspect had already led the deceased into distress, which led him to commit suicide. The investigation is still underway and the witnesses were examined. The petitioner’s presence may be required for custodial interrogation. As such, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.

Upon careful consideration of the rival submissions and the material furnished and available on record, the specific allegation against the petitioner is that on 10.08.2026, when the deceased approached him with regard to the transfer of rights over the vehicle to the vendee, during the said discussion, he is said to have made a statement that if he dies, the insurance policy will apply to him. As per the prosecution that deliberation caused serious distress to the deceased and led him to take the extreme step of committing suicide. It is settled position of law that for the offence of abetment of suicide, the allegations of abetment of suicide have to qualify the requirements of abetment within the scope of Section 45 of BNSS, which requires a positive act or intentional aid by the accused to the deceased for committing suicide. In the instant case, as per the prosecution, except for the exchange of words, no overt act has been attributed. It is settled position that, at this stage of considering the application, the Court is not ordinarily expected to undertake a meticulous examination of the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations so as to record effective findings on disputed questions of fact. In the instant case, having regard to the nature of the allegations against the petitioner, the specific role attributed to him and the readiness of the petitioner to cooperate with the investigation, in the absence of any specific reason or ground put forth by the prosecution eliciting the genuine requirement of custodial interrogation of the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that the prayer of the petitioner, in exercising discretionary jurisdiction, deserves positive consideration. This Court is of the considered view that the petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory bail deserves positive consideration, subject to appropriate conditions.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed, subject to following conditions.

It is made clear that any observations made herein are confined solely to the adjudication of the present application for anticipatory bail and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.