In an application filed before the Bombay High Court under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) seeking bail in an FIR registered for offences punishable under Sections 108, 85, and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), a Single Judge Bench of Justice Milind N. Jadhav directed the applicant to be released on bail.
The 37-year-old applicant, a lecturer at D. Y. Patil Engineering College, Pune, was arraigned as accused 1 in the said FIR. The other four co-accused, his father, brother, sister-in-law and mother, were protected by anticipatory bail orders. The victim, his 40-year-old wife, committed suicide, and the FIR was lodged by her brother, a serving Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police. The marriage was solemnized on 13-07-2025, and the applicant had an earlier marriage that ended in divorce. After the marriage, the couple lived in a joint family, and the FIR alleged that the mother-in-law and sister-in-law did not allow the victim to touch certain household articles and taunted her.
Regarding the applicant, the allegations were that he did not give the victim enough time, avoided taking her to relatives and outside, and pushed her away when she tried to come close. A month before the incident, the couple shifted to a separate flat and on 13-09-2026 at about 2 PM, a quarrel took place in which the victim allegedly expressed an intention to commit suicide if the applicant did not listen to her. The Applicant replied that she could do whatever she wanted and left to visit his brother. The victim called her maternal uncle complaining about her in-laws’ harassment and then hung herself. The applicant was arrested on 17-09-2026 on the prosecution’s allegation that he abetted the suicide.
The Court found that, prima facie, the specific instances of harassment in the statements were attributed to the mother-in-law and sister-in-law, and that the victim had separated from them one month before the incident, which, as per the Court, was a very strong and important circumstance. The Court held that words spoken in anger during a domestic quarrel, namely “do whatever you want,” followed by the applicant leaving the house, did not amount to instigation, intentional mens rea or conspiracy.
It was stated that abetment to suicide requires a direct, positive act by the accused, in proximity to the incident, which intentionally instigates the victim and cannot be a mere reaction to a quarrel. The Court also found that the FIR disclosed no such overt act. On cruelty, the Court held that not giving time to a spouse and not taking the spouse out were allegations of marital discord, and that it was understandable for a lecturer, not to have much time. The Court found no complaints by the victim regarding force, violence, abuse, or any time-bound demand for money or articles in 14 months of cohabitation.
The Court also found that the victim was short-tempered, that the applicant was well-qualified, had no antecedents, had deep roots in society, and that no recovery was pending. It was stated that the allegations against the four co-accused person also lacked material specifics and proofs. Hence, the Court concluded that custodial interrogation of the applicant was not necessary.
The Applicant was directed to be released immediately on a P.R. Bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. The conditions were that he report to the Investigating Officer on the first Sunday of every month between 10 AM and 12 PM, that he co-operate with the trial and attend all dates without unnecessary adjournments, not leave Maharashtra without the Trial Court’s permission, not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, keep the Investigating Officer informed of his address and mobile number, and understand that any infraction would entail cancellation of bail.
Thus, the application was allowed.
ALSO READ: Compounding of Companies Act Violation Wipes Out Auditor’s Prosecution: Patna High Court
