::1::
Criminal Bail Application No.212/2022
CNR NO. MHCC02-001066-2022
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 212 OF 2022
IN
C.R. NO. 13 OF 2022
Sanjay Rajendraprasad Sahani
Age: 33 Yrs., Occupation: Driver,
R/o: Galli No.12, 30th Feet Road,
Mandala, Mankhurd, Mumbai – 43.
(At present in the Custody of Arthur Road
…Applicant/ Accused
Prison)
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Mankhurd Police
Station Vide C.R. No.13/2022)
…Respondent
Appearances:
Advocate Mr. Santosh R. Pal for the applicant/Accused.
ADPP R.S. Bhandari for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : H.H.THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
SONALI P. AGARWAL (C.R. NO. 41)
DATED : 17th FEBRUARY, 2022.

::2::
Criminal Bail Application No.212/2022
:ORDER:
This is an bail application filed by accused under section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) for
grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.13/2022 for the offence
punishable under Sections 498(a), 306 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) registered with Mankhurd Police
Station.
2.

Heard argument of learned counsel for accused and Ld. ADPP for the
State.
3.

Prosecution has alleged that informant is brother of deceased Rekha
who got married with applicant-accused in 2016. It is further alleged that
after marriage, deceased Rekha went to her matrimonial home in U.P. to
reside. Thereafter in 2018, she came to Mumbai at her husband’s place. It
is further alleged that in May 2019, during lockdown she had come to her
mother’s place and she told her that applicant-accused abused her on the
ground that though seven years to her marriage have passed she has not
given birth to a child. It is further alleged that applicant-accused was given
understanding to improve his behavior and he told that he will maintain
deceased properly and she was again sent back to her matrimonial home at
Mumbai. Again in December 2021, deceased informed informant that
applicant-accused is subjecting her to physical and mental cruelty and
abusing her on the ground that she is unable to give birth to a child.
Thereafter, mother of deceased gave understanding to applicant-accused. It
is further alleged on 12.01.2021 on phone call deceased told informant
::3::
Criminal Bail Application No.212/2022
that applicant-accused is subjecting her cruelty as she is unable to give
birth to a child. It is alleged that on the same day, in the evening deceased
Rekha told informant on phone that she is very scared and she wants to
come back to home. It is further alleged that on 12.01.2022, informant
came to know that deceased has committed suicide by hanging herself the
house. Therefore, FIR came to be lodged with Police.
4.

Applicant-accused has contended that FIR is filed after delay of one
day. Applicant-accused has further contended that as per FIR informant
talked with deceased on 12.01.2021 on phone i.e. one year back and
deceased has committed suicide on 12.01.2022 i.e. after one year. It clearly
shows that accused has not tortured or subjected deceased to cruelty.
Applicant-accused has further contended that there is no evidence of
abetment to commit suicide. Applicant-accused has further contended that
Section 306 of IPC is not applicable in this case as there is no specific
allegation about any kind of abetment to commit suicide and prayed to be
released on bail.
5.

Prosecution has submitted that if accused is released on bail, then he
may threaten witnesses and tamper the evidence of prosecution.
Prosecution has further submitted that accused may abscond if released on
bail and objected the bail application.
6.

Learned counsel for accused has relied upon the judgment of the
Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Mahendra Singh and another v. State of
Madhya Pradesh With Gayatribai Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal
::4::
Criminal Bail Application No.212/2022
Appeal No.743 with 402 of 1989, decided on 7-2-1995, reported in 1996
CRI. L.J. 894, in which it is held that, “Abetment has been defined in
Section 107 IPC to mean that a person abets the doing of a thing who
firstly instigates any person to do a thing, or secondly, engages with one or
more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing,
if an act or illegal omission takes places in pursuance of that conspiracy,
and in order to the doing of that thing, or thirdly, intentionally aids, by any
act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Neither of the ingredients
of abetment are attracted on the statement of the deceased. The conviction
of the appellants under Section 306 IPC merely on the allegation of
harassment to the deceased is not sustainable. The appellants deserve to
be acquitted of the charge.” In the case in hand it is specifically alleged
that deceased and applicant-accused got married in the year 2016 and
since 2019, deceased was telling her parent’s side people that she is
subjected to mental and physical cruelty on the ground that she has not
given birth to a child by applicant-accused constantly. Hence, it appears,
there is specific allegations against accused. Constant physical and mental
cruelty can definitely be called an instigation to commit suicide. Therefore,
it appears, Section 306 of IPC is applicable.
7.

On the same point, learned counsel for applicant has cited Judgment
of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Prahaladdas Vs. State of M.P. and Ors.
decided on 18.04.1995, reported in MANU/SC/1229/1995, in which it is
held that, “In the first place it is difficult, in the facts and circumstances, to
come to even a prima facie view that what was uttered by the Appellant
was enough to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. Those words are
::5::
Criminal Bail Application No.212/2022
casual in nature which are often employed in the heat of moment between
quarrelling people. Nothing serious is expected to follow thereafter. The
said act does not reflect the requisite mens rea on the assumption that
these words would be carried out in all events. Besides the deceased had
plenty of time to weigh the pros and cons of the act by which he ultimately
ended his life. It cannot be said that the suicide by the deceased was the
direct result of the words uttered by the Appellant.” In the cited case the
words were uttered by accused. But in the case in hand it is alleged that
deceased is subjected to constant physical and mental cruelty for years
constantly for not giving birth to a child and abused also in filthy language
by words, “rq
cka> gS] vHkkxu vkSj dqy{k.kh gS ”. Therefore, facts of the
case cited and in hand are different. Hence, this case law is not applicable
to the case in hand.
8.

Learned counsel for accused has contended that one phone call
conversation between informant and deceased is of 12.01.2021 and suicide
is committed after one year and it shows that there is no abetment by
accused. Matter is at the stage of investigation. It is specifically alleged that
deceased was subjected to physical and mental cruelty for years for not
giving birth to a child constantly by accused. There is reference of phone
call made before one year. But on the basis of same, it cannot be concluded
that the entire allegations in the FIR are false. The allegations against
applicant is serious that due to his constant mental torture his wife has
committed suicide. Yet investigation is not complete. Therefore, at this
stage if accused is released on bail, there is every possibility that he will
::6::
Criminal Bail Application No.212/2022
tamper and hamper with investigation. Therefore, it will not be proper to
release accused on bail. Hence, pass following order:
ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No.212 of 2022 is rejected.

2.

Criminal Bail Application No.212 of 2022 stands disposed of
accordingly.

Dt. 17.02.2022
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
(SONALI P. AGARWAL)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Bombay
: 17.02.2022
: 17.02.2022
: 17.02.2022
::7::
Criminal Bail Application No.212/2022
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
18/02/2022 at 05.59 p.m.
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME
Subhash Sukhdeo Poul
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H.H.J. Sonali P. Agarwal
Room No.
Room No.41)
Date
of
Pronouncement
Judgment/Order
of 17/02/2022
Judgment/Order signed by P.O.on
17/02/2022
Judgment/Order uploaded on
18/02/2022
(Court