Ratnibai & Pannalal vs State Of M.P

Vivek Rusia, J

This is first application filed under section 439 Cr.P.C seeking bail in connection with Crime No.129/2021 registered at Police Station â€" Jeeran,

District â€" Neemuch(M.P.) for the offence punishable under section 306 and 34 of IPC. The applicants are in custody since 01/06/2021.

As per prosecution case, on 25/05/2021 a merg was registered on account of death of Kanku Bai due to drowning in the local well. Her dead-body

was taken out and sent for Postmortem report. As per Postmortem report, she died due to the injuries caused by drowning. The police recorded the

statement of one Ishwar son of the deceased on 7/06/2021 in which he disclosed that Kankubai and her husband Ramesh had a dispute with present

applicant Pannalal and Ratnibai on account of some blockage in the drainage due to which she committed suicide. Accordingly, the applicants have

been made accused in this case.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further

submits that the offence under Section 306 of IPC is not made out in this case. There is no allegation of instigation or abetment against the present

applicants. He further submits that the applicants are in custody since 01/06/2021. Investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed. Conclusion of

trial will take sufficient long time. Hence, they be released on bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the non-applicant/State opposes the bail application.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

The law with regard to the applicability of Section 306 of IPC is well settled. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the recent 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.â€​

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 suicideâ€. Reversing the judgment of the High Court, the petition under Section 482 was

allowed and the FIR was quashed.â€​

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the law laid by the Apex Court in the case of Arnab Manoranjan Goswami(supra),

but without commenting on the merit of the case, the application is allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on bail upon their furnishing

personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand)each with one solvent surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial

Court for their appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial and

shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

Before releasing the applicants from the custody the jail authorities are directed to medically examine them in order to rule out the possibility of

COVID -19 infections and shall comply with the direction given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Writ Petition No.1/2020.

C.c as per rules.