IN THE HIGH COURT QF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAH^ a: w MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE iPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4456 OF 2025 Between: 1. Jalaparthi Hima Bindu @ Polavarapu Hima Bindu, W/o. 32 Years, Harsha, Aged Now at R/o. Kanchikacharla Village and Mandal, Sathavahana Nagar, Kukatpalli, Hyderabad, Telangana State. 2. Polavarapu Harsha @ Polavarapu Sriharsha, S/o. Venkata Durga Prasad, Aged 35 Years, R/o. H.No. 2-22-193/B/302, Hanumas Balaji Residency, Jaya Nagar, Tirumalagiri Hyderabad, Telengana State. Plot No. 130 Kukatpally, ...Petitioners/Accused Nos. 2 & 3 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Through the Station Kanchikacherla Police Station, NTR District. High Court of House Officer, ...Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS, is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner pending disposal of Crime No. 63 of 2025 Nos. 2 & 3 on bail on the file of the Kanchikacherla Police Station, NTR District, in the interest of justice. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri appearing on behalf of Sri Uday Kumar Vampugadavala, Advocate for the Petitioners and of Pubiic Prosecutor for Respondent, the Court made the following C.Nageswara Rao, learned Senior Counsel APHC010210462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO r.RlMlNAI PETITION NO: 4456/2025 Between: Jalaparthi Hima Bindu @ Polavarapu Hima ..,PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) Bindu and Others AND ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. UDAY KUMAR VAMPUGADAVALA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Sections 480 and 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the petitioners herein/A2 and A3 seeking regular bail in Crime No.63 of 2025 of Kanchikacherla Police Station. NTR District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 351(2) read with 3(5) of the BNS. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant was married to the deceased, Jallparthi Veera Manohar, five months ago. The deceased was employed as a Maintenance Manager at Help Hospital, Vijayawada. After their marriage, he gave some gold ornaments to A1 to wear. Later, the deceased asked A1 to return the ornaments so that he could obtain a gold loan and clear his financial debts. However, A1 informed him that she had given the ornaments to her daughter, A2. 2. 2 without his knowledge. This led to a dispute between the deceased and A1. Subsequently, on the eve of the Sankranthi festival, A.2 and A.3 came to Kanchikacherla from Hyderabad. During that time, a quarrel broke out between the deceased and A1 to A4. The accused allegedly threatened and verbally abused the deceased, referring to his financial debts and stated better to die rather living and then he vexed on his life and committed suicide on 07.03.2025 by consuming Pesticide poison due to the harassment of A1 to A4, and he was then Shifted to Help Hospital, where he underwent treatment; however, he succumbed to the effects of the poison and passed away on 14.03.2025 at 15;00 hours. Heard Sri C.Nageswara Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing on 3. behalf of the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State. Perused the material on record. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that 1^* petitioner herein is the sister of the deceased and the 2 petitioner is the husband of 1®* petitioner. The parents of the deceased were also shown as A1 and A4 and they were granted anticipatory bail by 4. nd this Court vide order dated 17.04.2025 in Crl.P.No.3725 of 2025. 5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that most of the investigation in the present crime is completed, except receiving RFSL report. 3 6. In Mohit Singhal gnd another v. State of Uttarakhand and others^ the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the accused must have mens rea to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. The act of instigation must be intensity that it is intended to push the deceased to such a position under which he or she, has no choice, but to commit suicide, such instigation must be in close proximity to the act of committing suicide. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Of Gangula Mohan Reddy V. State of A.P.^, held that clear mens rea to commit offence must be present for proving the abetment of suicide. It held as under; “20. Abetment involves a mental process of instigation a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing, without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. ” The Supreme Court also held that it is not possible to lay down any formula in dealing with such cases. 7. The word “instigate" denotes incitement or urging to do drastic or inadvisable action or to stimulate or incite. Presence of 8. some mens rea, therefore, is the necessary concomitant of instigation. As per the observation made in M.Mohan V.State of Tamilnadu^, while dealing with ingredients of Section 306 of IPC as under; ‘Before holding an accused guilty of an offence under Section 306 IPC, the Court must scrupulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case and also assess the evidence adduced before it in order to find out whether the cruelty and harassment meted out to the victim had left the victim with 9. no ' Criminal Appeal No.3578 of2023 dated 01.12.2023 ^ AIR 2010 SC 327 ^(2011)3 see 626 4 Other alternative, buHo commit suicide. It is also to be born in mind that in cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be poof of direct or indirect act of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 of IPC is not sustainable. % occurrence on 10. A plain reading of the order passed by this Court, dated 17.04.2025 in Crl.P.No.3725 of 2025 goes to show that while disposing of the anticipatory bail application of A1 and A4, this Court observed that upon overall assessment of the material on record, this Court is of the view that the property disputes among family members appear to be the primary reason behind the deceased’s suicide. Although petitioners 2 and 3 therein are said to be residing elsewhere, certain allegations have been made linking them to the incident. After considering the material on record and various precedents, this Court granted anticipatory bail to A1 and A4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court IS of the view that most of the investigation in the present crime pertaining to the role played by the petitioners herein have been completed and any further detention of the petitioners is not required to conduct to further investigation and hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners herein/A2 and A3, with the following conditions: i. The petitioners herein/A2 and A3 shall be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees 11. twenty five 5 thousand only) each with tvyo (2) sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nandigama. ii. The petitioners shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required and that they shall not cause any threat, inducement or promise to the prosecution witnesses. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. 12. •/ SD/- P.VINOD KUMAR ASSISTANT^i^iSTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To 1. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nandigama, Krishna District. The Superintendent, Sub-Jail, Jaggaiahpeta, NTR District. The Station House Officer, Kanchikacherla Police Station, NTR District. One CC to Sri Uday Kumar Vampugadavala, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of A.P. Amaravati.[OUT] One spare copy. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PSD HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED:05/05/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.4456 of 2025 ALLOWED