YOGESHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

(2.) The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.5 in the following background: It is stated that complainant's son by name Girisha was engaged in business and he was an agent for several companies. He had borrowed loans from the petitioner and others on interest and he had suffered huge losses in his business and was unable to repay his creditors and while borrowing loans he had indiscriminately issued signed blank cheques and had also executed promissory notes in favour of the petitioner and others. He was unable to make any profits in his business and therefore, the complainant alleged that his son was instigated to commit suicide by harassment and humiliation caused by the petitioner and others. Hence, the case was lodged against the petitioner and others for having abetted the complainant's son in committing suicide apart from invoking other provisions of the Indian Penal Code, as also the provisions of the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 and the Karnataka Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act, 2004.

(3.) However, it is to be noticed that in order to bring home the primary charge of abetment or having instigated the complainant's son to commit suicide, it would not be sufficient to merely allege that petitioner had lent monies to his son and thereafter, humiliated and harassed him which has lead to the commission of suicide of complainant's son. This would not come under the definition of abetment as defined under the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, the prosecution would have to establish its case at trial. Hence, the petitioner has made out a case for enlargement on bail.