Dutkaiya, P.S. Rajim, Distt. Gariyaband (C.G.) v. The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Of
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:39852 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6281 of 2025 Madar Khan @ Salim Khan S/o Late Shri Najeem Khan, Aged About 52 Years R/o. Village- Dutkaiya, P.S. Rajim, Distt. Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Doundi, Distt. Balod (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.08.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 53/2024 registered at Police Station Doundi, District – Balod (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 108 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.08.08 20:17:10 +0530 2. The prosecution story in short is that Devendra Kumar Thakur committed suicide by hanging on 03.09.2024. Accordingly, Merg No. 52/2024 was registered, and merg statements were recorded. It was revealed that the deceased was a teacher and had a friendship with Harendra Netam, who 2 introduced him to the present applicant, Madar Khan, and Pradip Singh Thakur during the year 2021–22. It is alleged that they collected money from around 70–80 individuals by promising them jobs in the Forest Department. An interview was also arranged at Raipur in July 2022, and the candidates were assured that appointment letters would be issued within two months, failing which the money would be returned. However, no appointment letters were issued, and even after the lapse of two years, neither the jobs were provided nor the money returned. As a result, the deceased was under severe mental pressure and ultimately committed suicide by hanging himself. Before taking this extreme step, he wrote a suicide note holding Harendra Netam, Madar Khan @ Salim Khan, Pradip Singh Thakur, and former Forest Minister Mohammad Akbar responsible for his death, stating that they had taken money from the candidates but failed to return it. Based on this, the police registered an offence against the applicant and others, and after completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed on 07.12.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case. He submits that the deceased himself worked as a collection clerk and collected the money from various persons. When the candidates started pressuring Devendra Thakur regarding the job promises, he committed suicide. He also submits that the prosecution story indicates that the deceased committed suicide and left a suicide note naming the applicant and others as responsible for his death due to unfulfilled job promises and unreturned money. However, for an offence like abetment to suicide, the prosecution must establish direct or indirect instigation, encouragement, or active participation by the accused that drove the deceased to commit suicide. He submits that suicide is ultimately a 3 voluntary act of the deceased. While there may have been pressure arising from unfulfilled promises and unreturned money, the connection between such actions and the deceased’s decision to commit suicide must be strong enough to constitute abetment under the law. He further submits that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet was filed on 07.12.2024, and the applicant has been in jail since 03.09.2024. Till date, only 11 prosecution witnesses have been examined out of 70. From the perusal of the long list of witnesses, it is evident that there is no possibility of an early conclusion of the trial. A copy of the order sheet is filed herewith and marked as Annexure A-3. He also submits that merely mentioning the name of a person in a suicide note is not sufÏcient to implicate him in a case of abetment, especially when no specific act has been alleged against the applicant which would fall within the purview of the legal ingredients of abetment. The deceased had the option to initiate criminal prosecution for non-return of money or for cheating, rather than taking the extreme step of committing suicide. The suicide note neither contains any date or month, nor is it signed by the writer. Although it has been sent to a handwriting expert, no report has been submitted till date confirming whether the handwriting matches that of the deceased. He also submits that the present applicant has 17 criminal antecedents under the IPC, out of which only 4 cases are pending. An explanation for the same has already been provided in the present bail application. He submits that the present applicant has been in jail since 03.09.2024, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. He 5. 6. 4 submits that considering the criminal antecedents of the present applicant and the fact that his name was mentioned in the suicide note written by the deceased, he is not entitled to the grant of bail. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that though the name of the present applicant was mentioned in the suicide note written by the deceased, Devendra Kumar Thakur, till date, the statements of only 14 prosecution witnesses have been recorded out of 70 witnesses. Further, the applicant has only 4 criminal antecedents pending against him out of 17. The charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case and the applicant has been in jail since 03.09.2024, looking to the period of detention of the applicant, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Madar Khan @ Salim Khan, involved in Crime No. 53/2024 registered at Police Station Doundi, District – Balod (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 108 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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 she 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. 5 (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her 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 her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (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 her in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Abhishek Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice