High Court

1. Heard Shri Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Anurag Verma, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.

2. By means of this application, the applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0070 of 2022 under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Khandasa, District Ayodhya.

3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 15.03.2022 against the applicant, his wife and his son, stating that there was a dispute regarding ancestral property between the informant and the accused persons. On 15.02.2022, an altercation took place between the accused persons and the informant's husband, during which, they asked the informant's husband to die by consuming poison and thereafter, the informant's husband consumed poison.

4. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed on 07.01.2025:- "1. Heard Sri Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned AGA for the State.

2. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date.

3. Steps within a week.

4. Office to proceed accordingly.

5. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No. 0070 of 2022, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station - Khandasa, District - Ayodhya. It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence, as alleged.

6. Attention has been drawn by the learned counsel for the applicant towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the allegations have been levelled against three accused persons including the present applicant to the effect that the present applicant was torturing his real brother for property dispute and has allegedly told his brother (since deceased) that he will not get anything from the property so he should die. Thereafter, the brother of the applicant committed suicide consuming poison.

7. Learned counsel has stated that in this case there is no overt or positive act of the applicant instigating or compelling the victim to commit suicide. As a matter of fact the factum of abetment is missing, therefore, the F.I,.R. u/s 306 IPC may not be registered. As a matter of fact there is no property dispute between the parties and the present applicant is not aware as to why such allegation has been levelled against him. The present applicant is having his permanent address, therefore, there is no flight risk, if his liberty is protected. Learned counsel has further submitted that during investigation the present applicant cooperated in the investigation and now charge-sheet has been filed. He undertakes that he shall cooperate in the proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, therefore, his liberty may be protected in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

8. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid prayer of the learned counsel for the applicant but could not dispute the submissions so made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

9. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties; other material available on record; and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the proceedings, I find it appropriate that liberty of the present applicant may be protected in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal (supra).

10. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

11. List in the week commencing 17.2.2025.

12. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant- Jay Prakash Tiwari shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:- I. that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; II. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; III. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; IV. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; V. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted."

5. The office has reported that notice of the bail application was served upon the opposite party No.2 on 17.02.2025, but nobody has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No.2.

6. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and a copy of the charge sheet dated 23.04.2022 against all the accused persons.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant says that the applicant has already furnished bail bonds in compliance of the interim order dated

07.01.2025.

8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds no good ground to take a view different from the one taken at the time of grant of interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 07.01.2025. Accordingly, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant by means of an order dated 07.01.2025. is made absolute and this anticipatory bail application stands allowed in terms of the aforesaid interim order. Order Date :- 21.3.2025/ Gurpreet Singh [Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]

1. Heard Shri Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Anurag Verma, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record.

2. By means of this application, the applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0070 of 2022 under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Khandasa, District Ayodhya.

3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 15.03.2022 against the applicant, his wife and his son, stating that there was a dispute regarding ancestral property between the informant and the accused persons. On 15.02.2022, an altercation took place between the accused persons and the informant's husband, during which, they asked the informant's husband to die by consuming poison and thereafter, the informant's husband consumed poison.

4. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed on 07.01.2025:- "1. Heard Sri Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned AGA for the State.

2. Issue notice to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date.

3. Steps within a week.

4. Office to proceed accordingly.

5. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is apprehending his arrest in Case Crime No. 0070 of 2022, under Section 306 IPC, Police Station - Khandasa, District - Ayodhya. It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence, as alleged.

6. Attention has been drawn by the learned counsel for the applicant towards the impugned F.I.R. wherein the allegations have been levelled against three accused persons including the present applicant to the effect that the present applicant was torturing his real brother for property dispute and has allegedly told his brother (since deceased) that he will not get anything from the property so he should die. Thereafter, the brother of the applicant committed suicide consuming poison.

7. Learned counsel has stated that in this case there is no overt or positive act of the applicant instigating or compelling the victim to commit suicide. As a matter of fact the factum of abetment is missing, therefore, the F.I,.R. u/s 306 IPC may not be registered. As a matter of fact there is no property dispute between the parties and the present applicant is not aware as to why such allegation has been levelled against him. The present applicant is having his permanent address, therefore, there is no flight risk, if his liberty is protected. Learned counsel has further submitted that during investigation the present applicant cooperated in the investigation and now charge-sheet has been filed. He undertakes that he shall cooperate in the proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, therefore, his liberty may be protected in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 SCC online SC 98.

8. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the aforesaid prayer of the learned counsel for the applicant but could not dispute the submissions so made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

9. Without entering into merits of the issue; considering the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties; other material available on record; and undertaking of the applicant that he shall cooperate in the proceedings, I find it appropriate that liberty of the present applicant may be protected in view of the dictum of the Apex Court in re; Sushila Aggarwal (supra).

10. Let counter affidavit be filed within a period of four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within a period of two weeks thereafter.

11. List in the week commencing 17.2.2025.

12. Till the next date of listing, it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant- Jay Prakash Tiwari shall be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/ court concerned with the following conditions:- I. that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; II. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; III. that in default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; IV. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; V. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted."

5. The office has reported that notice of the bail application was served upon the opposite party No.2 on 17.02.2025, but nobody has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No.2.

6. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and a copy of the charge sheet dated 23.04.2022 against all the accused persons.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant says that the applicant has already furnished bail bonds in compliance of the interim order dated

07.01.2025.

8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds no good ground to take a view different from the one taken at the time of grant of interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 07.01.2025. Accordingly, the interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant by means of an order dated 07.01.2025. is made absolute and this anticipatory bail application stands allowed in terms of the aforesaid interim order. Order Date :- 21.3.2025/ Gurpreet Singh [Subhash Vidyarthi,J.]