AI Structured Summary
Facts, law points, precedents, ratio and the final ruling — distilled from the full judgment
AI Structured Summary
Facts, law points, precedents, ratio and the final ruling — distilled from the full judgment
Facts
This was the first bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.405/2021, Police Station Dwarkapuri, District Indore, for an alleged offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. According to the prosecution, the deceased Deepak had a love affair with a girl who broke the relationship; the applicant allegedly taunted the deceased about the breakup and told him that he was the new boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend. The deceased became disturbed and hanged himself in his house, leaving an audio message in the name of his mother, on the basis of which the FIR was registered against the applicant. Counsel for the applicant submitted that the ingredients of Section 306 IPC were missing, that the applicant was a 20-year-old college student, that there was no abetment or instigation on his part, that his career would be spoiled if he were arrested, and that he was ready to cooperate with the investigation. The panel lawyer for the State opposed the bail application. The court referred to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v State of Maharashtra and Others, 2020 SCC Online SC 964, and, considering the facts and circumstances without commenting on merits, allowed the bail application.
Law Points
The legal questions were whether the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in connection with the alleged offence under Section 306 IPC; whether the ingredients of Section 306 IPC and abetment as contemplated by Section 107 IPC were made out against the applicant; and what is the scope of Sections 107 and 306 IPC, particularly whether specific abetment or instigation with intention to bring about suicide is required.
Acts & Articles
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Sections 438 and 482. Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 107 and 306.
Judgments Referred
Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v State of Maharashtra and Others, 2020 SCC Online SC 964 — relied upon and applied by the High Court, which referred to the Supreme Court's summary of the law on the scope of Sections 107 and 306 IPC, including that specific abetment with intention to bring about the suicide is required and that a suicide note expressing anguish cannot be depicted as expressing anything intentional on the part of the accused that the deceased might commit suicide; the Supreme Court in that case had reversed the High Court and allowed the petition under Section 482, quashing the FIR. No other prior decisions are cited in the judgment.
Obiter Dicta
The court expressly stated that it was allowing the bail application without commenting on the merits of the case.
Ratio Decidendi
For an offence under Section 306 IPC, specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107 IPC on the part of the accused, with intention to bring about the suicide of the person concerned as a result of that abetment, is required; mere taunting or a suicide note or audio message expressing anguish cannot by itself establish such abetment. Applying that principle, and without deciding merits, the court held that the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in the facts alleged.
Final Ruling
The bail application was allowed. It was directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime number, he shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. The order is governed by the conditions that the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; if he is found involved in any criminal case of the same nature during the bail period, the order granting anticipatory bail shall be liable to be cancelled; and he shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. Certified copy as per rules. The applicant thus gets protection from arrest in the subject crime subject to these conditions, while the investigation may continue.
Plain-Language Gist
The applicant was accused of abetting the suicide of a man by taunting him after a breakup. He asked the High Court for anticipatory bail so that he would not be arrested. The High Court allowed the request on conditions, relying on Supreme Court law that mere taunting or an audio message expressing anguish is not enough to show the specific instigation required for abetment of suicide.
AI-generated summary — verify against the full judgment text before relying on it in practice.
Judgment
Vivek Rusia, J
This is first bail application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.405/2021, Police-Station- Dwarkapuri, District- Indore for commission of the offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
As per prosecution case, deceased-Deepak was having love affair with a girl but she broke the relationship. This applicant used to taunt the deceased- Deepak for his breakup and used to tell that he is the new boy friend of his ex-girl friend. Because of this he becomes disturbed and hanged himself in the house. Before taking this drastic step he left an audio message in the name of his mother. On the basis of that audio message the F.I.R. has been registered against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that ingredients of Section 306 of the IPC are missing in this case. The applicant is a youth aged 20 years studying in a college. There is no abetment or instigation on his part and if he is arrested his career will be spoiled hence, he may be protected from arrest. He is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Learned panel lawyer for the respondent/State opposes the bail application.
In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court of India in case of Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Vs State of Maharashtra and Others reported in
2020 SCC Online SC 964 has again summarized the law in respect of the scope of section 107 & 306 of the I.P.C., the relevant paragraphs are as under:-
“57. Dealing with the provisions of Section 306 of the IPC and the meaning of abetment within the meaning of Section 107, the Court observed:
“12. In order to bring out an offence under Section 306 IPC specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107 IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring about the suicide of the person concerned as a result of that abetment is required. The intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this particular offence under Section 306 IPC. We are of the clear opinion that there is no question of there being any material for offence under Section 306 IPC either in the FIR or in the so-called suicide note.”
58.The Court noted that the suicide note expressed a state of anguish of the deceased and “cannot be depicted as expressing anything intentional on the part of the accused that the deceased might commit suicide”. Reversing the judgment of the High Court, the petition under Section 482 was allowed and the FIR was quashed.”
Considering the facts and circumstances, without commenting on the merit of the case, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime number, he shall be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. This order shall be governed by the following conditions:
(a) the applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;
(b) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(c) If the applicant is found involved in any criminal case of the same nature during this bail period, this order granting the benefit of anticipatory bail shall be liable to be cancelled; and
(d) he shall not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court.
Certified copy as per rules.