Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 123 (CHH)

VINOD BANGALI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2003-07-04

L.C.BHADOO

body2003
ORDER This application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the accused/applicant who is facing trial under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. The prosecution story is that the deceased Vinod Kumar Gupta committed suicide on 27th March 2003 at about 11 p.m. by jumping before the running train. The merg intimation was given by Sub Inspector G.R. Morya, on that the investigation was started and one suicidal note was also found in the pocket of deceased Vinod Kumar Gupta in which he has written that he is committing suicide on account of harassment committed by the accused persons namely, Vinod Bangali and G. Naidu. It is submitted that the charge sheet has been filed. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the accused is in jail since 1-4-2003 and thereby he is in jail since more than 3 months and more-over, he submitted that in this case the only allegation against the accused is that some loan was outstanding against the deceased for which the accused along with one G. Naidu were demanding money back from the deceased and he was not able to repay the loan, therefore, allegation against the accused is that they were harassing and even they threatened to beat him. The accused persons have threatened the deceased on 13th and 22nd of March with aire consequences and on the rateful day at 9 a.m. Naidu came and, asked for the money and the present accused/applicant also threatened the deceased that if the amount is not received by 10 a.m. then he will be abaucted, therefore, this act of the accused persons even it taken as it is, the same does not come within the purview of abetment, therefore, he is entitled for bail. He further argued that in order to make out abetment there must be some intention or abetment and is the deceased committed suicide on account of mental stress, as he was not able to repay the loan, the offence of the abetment is not made out against the accused. On the other hand, the learned panel lawyer opposed the bail application and stated that the bail application of the other accused has already been rejected by this Court. On the other hand, the learned panel lawyer opposed the bail application and stated that the bail application of the other accused has already been rejected by this Court. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the fact that the accused is in jail since 1-4-2003 and thereby he is in jail since more than 3 months and also having regard to the case law cited by the learned counsel for the applicant that in order to make out the case for abetment there must be some intention of abetment to force the deceased to commit suicide and that abetment was so imminent that the deceased has no other option and time to take decision and on account of that abetment the deceased has committed suicide. I am of the view that looking to the facts and circumstances of the case the accused/applicant is entitled for bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is, therefore, directed that if the accused/applicant furnishes a personal bond in sum of Rs. 5,000/- with a surety in the likewise amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, he be released on bail. Parties are entitled for certified copy of this order. Application Allowed.