Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 912 (ALL)

Naitik Shukla v. State Of U. P.

2023-04-05

JYOTSNA SHARMA

body2023
JUDGMENT : (Jyotsna Sharma, J.) 1. Heard Sri Kripa Shankar Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Kumar Sreshtha and Sri Gaurav Singh, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Rakesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant-Naitik Shukla seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0687 of 2022, under section- 306 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali, District- Lalitpur. 3. As per the allegations in the F.I.R. lodged by father of the deceased his son Uday Bajpayee, who was working in Expressway Courier Company Agra, did not turn up in his office on 10.09.2022; his father tried to contact him but he was not available, therefore the first informant, his wife and his younger son went to Agra to enquire about his whereabouts but he was not found there; the first informant lodged a missing report on 17.09.2022; later, he was informed that his son has committed suicide in a lodge in Lalitpur by hanging himself. It is mentioned in the F.I.R. that a suicide note of 11 pages written in english language was also found in which it was clearly mentioned that the present applicant Naitik Shukla and two others were squarely responsible for his suicide. 4. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case; the deceased was working as an Executive in the company; the applicant and the deceased were working at different units; he never instigated the commission of suicide and nor he can be connected with the same; before this incident, an altercation took place between the applicant, the deceased and some other employees of the company for which he lodged an F.I.R. It is argued that the gap between that incident and the commission of suicide is so long that it cannot be presumed that the previous incident contributed towards commission of suicide and that the applicant was responsible for the same. Two of the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shabbir Hussain vs. State of M.P. and Others, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 743 and State of West Bengal and Indrajit Kundu and Others, reported in (2019) 10 SCC 188 have been cited to stress the argument that the previous incident cannot be treated as the precursor for the instant crime and nor the applicant can be slapped with any responsibility for the same. 5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by the learned A.G.A. and the private counsel for the first informant highlighting the fact that the 11 pages suicide note describes in sequence all the facts and circumstances, right from the date of the F.I.R. lodged from the side of the applicant about a previous incident between the two, till commission of suicide; even a cursory look at the suicide note shall give an impression that the deceased was being harassed by the applicant and he felt insulted and frustrated to such an extent that he was forced to take such extreme step of taking his own life; my attention has been drawn to whatsapp message/status uploaded by the deceased a few days before committing suicide in which he said that the present applicant and two others Sunil and Girish Tomar have been threatening him to fire him from the job and that the instant applicant has been demanding alcohol etc. and bullying and brow beating him on his small mistakes; he misbehaved and said objectionable things to him, therefore he is dropping his job and going to commit suicide. 6. As far as the legal argument raised by the applicant is concerned, it is argued that for constitution of offence of abetment to commit suicide, "the instigation" need not be expressed in so many words. The intention to "instigate" can only be gathered from facts and circumstances, which preceded the "act of suicide". Further, at the stage of grant of bail (anticipatory or regular), a deep or penetrative analysis of a suicide note, which is legally a dying declaration, is uncalled for. Merits of the evidence are important, even for bail but not in the same manner as in a full-fledged trial. The mental status, the anguish, the agony caused to the victim by direct acts of the applicant were responsible for compelling the deceased to take his own life. Merits of the evidence are important, even for bail but not in the same manner as in a full-fledged trial. The mental status, the anguish, the agony caused to the victim by direct acts of the applicant were responsible for compelling the deceased to take his own life. It is vehemently argued that intention is not a mystical thing and can be gathered from overt acts. As far as grant of anticipatory bail to co-accused Girish Tomar and Sunil Kumar is concerned, present applicant's case stands on different footing as he prima-facie appears to be the main culprit. 7. I considered the submissions of both the sides in the light of material on record, nature of accusations, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case. I do not find it a fit case to grant benefit of anticipatory bail. 8. Hence, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. 9. However, any of the observations made herein shall not be taken as a comment on merits of the case and the learned trial court shall be at liberty to form its own opinion, on the basis of material before him, at any stage of the case.