Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:19391 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2691 of 2025 Jwala Prasad Khande S/o Resham Lal Khande Aged About 44 Years R/o Village - Pendari, Police Station - Sakri, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Sakri, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Samarth Singh Marhas, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Malay Jain, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29/04/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 32/2025 registered at Police Station Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 4 of Chhattisgarh Debtors Protection Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.01.2025, the deceased Vrishbhan Singh committed suicide by consuming ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.04.30 11:16:46 +0530 2 poison, a merg was registered by Police Station Sakri. During the body panchnama proceedings, a suicide note written by the deceased and a photocopy of an agreement were seized from the relatives of the deceased. During the inquest, the loan booklet of farm of the deceased and one stamp paper i.e., original copy of the agreement was seized from the applicant Jwala Prasad Khande. In the investigation, it was found that the applicant advanced a loan of Rs. 42,000/- to the deceased. The loan amount was returned by the deceased in installments i.e. Rs. 40,000/- on 04.04.23, Rs. 40,000/- on 08.08.23 and Rs. 10,000/- on 04.10.23 to the applicant. Even then the applicant demanded money from deceased. On 15.01.25 at around 8:00 - 09:00 AM, the applicant came to the house of deceased and said that if you return Rs. 3 lakhs along with the interest to him, then only he will return the loan booklet of his agricultural land, due to which the deceased being mentally tortured, in the afternoon went to Ashwani Gandharv's farm and consumed poison thereafter, he was admitted for treatment at CIMS hospital. During treatment, the deceased died at 6:30 PM. On the basis of merg, a crime was registered against the accused under Section 108 Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Debtors Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is falsely implicated in the instant criminal case. He further submits that the deceased voluntarily entered into an agreement stating that he was taking loan of Rs. 42,000/- from the present applicant on 03.02.2023. Since the deceased did not repay the amount of loan to 3 the applicant, therefore the applicant sought his money back from the deceased which cannot be attributed to the applicant as instigation making the deceased to commit suicide. Further, there is no evidence much less any endorsement in the agreement about the installment of money being paid back to the applicant. The deceased himself had entered into an agreement in the stamp paper stating that he is taking loan of Rs. 42,000/- from the applicant on 03.02.2023 which he would return within a period of 2 months. He further submits that the offence under Section 108 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Debtors Act, 1937 is not made out against the applicant because according to the First Information Report, the deceased had returned Rs. 40,000/- on 04.04.2023, Rs. 40,000/- on 08.08.2023 and Rs. 10,000/- on 04.10.2023 in installments and committed suicide about 1 year and 3 months from the date of returning the money i.e. payment of last installment. In the meantime, he did not make any complaint before any Court, police or any forum about the applicant not returning the loan booklet of his agricultural land, due to which it is clear that the loan amount was not returned by the deceased, which the applicant sought, therefore there was no instigation for suicide or any motive to harass the deceased and the applicant is in jail since 17.01.2025 and in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the 4 respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that in compliance of the Court's order dated 21.04. 2025, the investigation revealed that the applicant is being implicated in the present case on the basis of the deceased's suicide note, in which it was alleged that the applicant had lent the complainant ₹42,000/- but recovered ₹90,000/- with interest. The suicide note further revealed that the complainant was allegedly tortured by the applicant's recovery methods, leading to the complainant's consumption of poison and subsequent suicide. Accordingly, the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence levelled against the applicant and further considering the deceased's suicide note and the allegations leveled against the applicant, it is alleged that the applicant had received certain payments from the deceased on specific dates (04.04.2023, 08.08.2023 and 04.10.2023), although the mode of payments were not disclosed and the suicide note further alleges that the applicant failed to return the loan booklet ("rinpustika") to the deceased, which led to the deceased consuming poison and committing suicide, however, it appears that there is no clear evidence to suggest that the applicant abetted or knowingly aided the deceased in committing suicide, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 5 7. Let the Applicant -Jwala Prasad Khande involved in Crime No. 32/2025 registered at Police Station Sakri, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 108 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 4 of Chhattisgarh Debtors Protection Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 6 (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek