Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1454 (MP)

Pramila Atriwal v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2022-12-08

PRANAY VERMA

body2022
JUDGMENT Pranay Verma, J. - Since these applications arise out of the same crime number and are related to the same incident they have been heard together and are being decided by a common order. 2. These are first applications under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.1763/2022 registered at Police Station Lasudiya, District Indore (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 306/34 of the IPC, 1860. 3. As per prosecution, the deceased Karuna Sharma was operating BC fund. Many persons had invested in the fund. Applicant Pramila Atriwal had received her amount which she had not returned. Pramila had introduced the deceased to many persons who had invested in the funds on high rate of interest. When the time came for deceased to receive her amount the applicants refused to give the amount to her and started threatening her. Applicants started withholding the amount payable to the deceased and subsequently withheld the entire amount. The persons to whom the deceased had to make payment also started making demands for their money and also fought with her. Due to the financial crises and the acts of the applicants, deceased eventually committed suicide by hanging herself and left behind a suicide note detailing the harrasment meted out to her by the applicants on the basis of which they have been implicated for the present offence. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the case. It was a pure commercial transaction between the applicants and the deceased and dispute was only regards payment of the amount arising out of the BC funds. The applicants never instigating or abetted the deceased in any manner to commit suicide. They were either only asking for their amount or were not giving the amount to the deceased. It cannot be said that in view of the acts of the applicants, the deceased was left with no other option but to commit suicide. Prima facie offence under Section 306 of the IPC is not made out against the applicants. On such grounds prayer for grant of benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants has been made. 5. It cannot be said that in view of the acts of the applicants, the deceased was left with no other option but to commit suicide. Prima facie offence under Section 306 of the IPC is not made out against the applicants. On such grounds prayer for grant of benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants has been made. 5. The aforesaid prayer has been opposed by learned counsel for the respondent/State submitting that in view of the allegations levelled against applicants, they are not entitled for the benefit of grant of anticipatory bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case- diary. 7. There appears to have been monetary transactions between deceased and applicants and the applicants had to either pay the amount to the deceased or to receive the amount from her. The deceased was in a financial crises due to her transactions with the applicants. It is on that count that she felt mentally harassed. It cannot be said that the applicants played an active role and instigated or facilitated the commission of suicide of the deceased. It also cannot be said that in view of the acts of the applicants, the deceased was left with no other option but to commit suicide. Thus looking to the allegation levelled against the applicants, they deserve to be granted the benefit of anticipatory bail. 8. It is directed that in the event of arrest of applicants by the Arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety each of like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer). 9. The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a Police Officer, as and when required. Applicants shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in Sub Section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Certified copy as per rules.