JAYPALSINH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. Brijesh K. Ramanuj for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. L.B. Dabhi on behalf of the respondent-State.

(2.) By way of this application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant prays for being released on anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 11211031220095 of 2022 registered with Limbdi Police Station, District Surendranagar on 24/5/2022 for offences punishable under Sec. 306 of the Indian Penal Code, Ss. 40 and 42 of the Gujarat Money Lenders Act and Sec. 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr. Ramanuj for the applicant would submit that the present applicant who holds a licence for doing money lending activity, had infact lent an amount of Rs.5000.00 to the deceased i.e. father of the complainant and whereas a receipt for the said loan was also provided and whereas learned Advocate would submit that the applicant had not done any activity, whereby the deceased, could be said to have been abetted by the applicant in committing suicide. Learned Advocate taking this Court through the FIR would submit that as such, there is no suicide note written by the deceased and whereas the receipt relied upon by the first informant in the FIR, shows that some amount had been borrowed by the deceased from certain persons. Learned Advocate would also draw the attention of this Court to the averments made in the FIR and would submit that the deceased had informed his son few days before committing suicide that the present applicant, had called the deceased on his mobile phone and had strictly asked for recovery of the loan and furthermore it is submitted that an allegation of the applicant having assaulted the deceased, for recovery is not substantiated by any FIR filed by the deceased at the relevant point of time. Learned Advocate would therefore submit that this Court may grant indulgence to the applicant and release the applicant on anticipatory bail.