Anita Sharma v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail stands allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 438, 440
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 306
Judgment
SRI ANANDA SEN, J. For the Petitioner(s) For the State For the Informant ------ : Mr. Ankit Apurva, Advocate Mr. Shadab Bin Haque, Advocate : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, A.P.P. : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Deo, Advocate …...... 06/ 15.04.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant. This anticipatory bail application under Sections 438 and 440 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for the offence under Section 306 of IPC. The allegation in the F.I.R. is that the deceased has taken money from different persons and the same was given to the petitioner for selling the lands of the petitioner in favour of those persons. It is alleged that this petitioner has neither refunded the money nor had sold the land to the concerned persons. Those persons started pressurizing the deceased i.e. the husband of the informant to return the money.
Whenever the deceased asked for money from this petitioner, he was threatened. The deceased thereafter became depressed and committed suicide. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits there is no ingredients of Section 306 of IPC in this case. There is nothing to suggest that the petitioner ever instigated the deceased to commit suicide. He further submits that allegation is general and omnibus in nature and petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the informant submits that as the petitioner did not refund the money nor registered the land in favour of those persons who have parted with money thus, the petitioner was forced to commit suicide. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. After hearing the parties and from the facts mentioned in the F.I.R., prima facie I am of the opinion that there is nothing on record to suggest that petitioner has instigated the deceased to commit suicide.
Operative part
Even if for the sake of argument, it is accepted there was some pressure of the proposed purchaser, it cannot be said that this petitioner had committed any overt act which can lead to the positive conclusion that the petitioner had instigated the deceased to come suicide. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail stands allowed. The petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of his surrender or arrest, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Jagarnathpur Case No.190 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his name or in the name of his ancestors in which he is having share and to that effect, he has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his share in the property. R.S./
(ANANDA SEN, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the anticipatory bail stands allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 438, 440; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 306.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.