Criminal Law — Bail — Abetment of suicide — Section 108 read with Section 3(5), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Petition under Sections 480 and 483, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for bail — Deceased, a businessman running an oil mill, had borrowed ₹11,00,000/- from A1, ₹6,00,000/- from A2, and ₹4,00,000/- from A3 — Allegation that on 04-08-2025 at about 7.00 p.m., A4 to A6 went to the house of the deceased stating that they were sent by A1 and demanded repayment — When deceased said he would speak to A1 the next day, A4 to A6 humiliated him saying “Dabbulu kattaleni bathuku endhuku, ee bathuku bathike kante chaavadam melu” (If you cannot pay the money, what is the use of living; better to die than to live like this) — On 05-08-2025 deceased committed suicide by consuming poison pills — Held, as per FIR and complaint, the deceased’s act was primarily due to financial distress and there is no direct act or mens rea attributable to petitioners (A5 & A6) — Commercial transaction between deceased and petitioners established; demand for repayment of lawful debt without criminal intent or intimidation does not attract Section 108 BNS — Whether alleged words or conduct amount to abetment to be decided during investigation — At this stage, culpability cannot be presumed — Bail granted with conditions.
Held:
Demand for repayment of a lawful debt or insistence on repayment, in the absence of criminal intimidation, harassment or illegal compulsion, cannot by itself constitute abetment of suicide. Allegations being linked to a commercial transaction, and co-accused already granted anticipatory bail, petitioners entitled to regular bail.
ORDER:
Bail granted to Accused Nos.5 and 6 on executing personal bond of ₹20,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum, and subject to conditions regarding appearance before SHO and non-tampering of evidence.
APHC010531052025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3548]
FRIDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10323/2025
Between:
Singatala Siva Ram Krishna Reddy @ Siva
Reddy and Others
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
AND
The State Of Ap ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
1.MEDAPATI SANTOSH REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
2025:APHC:41225
ORDER:
Heard,
Sri Medapati Santosh Reddy, learned counsel for the
petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6 and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing
for the Respondent-State.
1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the
petitioner/Accused Nos.5 and 6 on bail in Crime.No.335 of 2025 of Proddatur
Rural Police Station, YSR Kadapa District for the offences punishable under
Section 108 r/w 3(5) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the deceased namely
V.Pedda Obula Reddy, who is the husband of the De facto complainant, had
been running an oil mill. During the course of his business, the deceased
borrowed an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- from the Accused No.1, Rs.6,00,000/-
from Accused No.2 and Rs.4,00,000/- from Accused No.3. Subsequently, as
he sustained loss in the business and in view of his health issues, the
deceased could not repay the debt to them. All the Accused have been
pressurizing the deceased to repay the amount due to which, the deceased
suffered lot of mental agony and was admitted in Suresh Hospital, Proddatur.
After discharging from the said hospital, the Accused No.1 called the
deceased to his office and made an agreement with him for repayment of
Rs.11,00,000/- due to him and forced the deceased to sign on the said
agreement. While so, on 04.08.2025 at about 07.00 p.m., Accused Nos. 4 to 6
2025:APHC:41225
came to the house of the deceased stating that they were sent by the Accused
No.1, demanded him to repay the debt, for which, the deceased told them that
he would talk to the Petitioner /Accused No.1 on the next day. However,
Accused Nos.4 to 6 humiliated him stating “Dabbulu Kattaleni Bathuku
Endhuku, Ee Bathuku Bathike Kante Chaavadam Melu”. Unable to bear with
such harassment, on 05.08.2025 the deceased had committed suicide by
consuming poison pills. Based on the complaint given by the wife of the
deceased, the present case has been registered against Accused Nos.1 to 6
for the offence under Section 108 read with 3(5) of BNS.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6 would submit
that the allegations levelled against the Petitioner are omnibus and baseless.
Learned counsel would further submit that the Petitioner has been doing
business in supplying oil seeds and in that connection, he supplied oil seeds
worth Rs.11,00,000/- to the deceased on credit basis. Learned counsel would
further submit that the Petitioner is merely a creditor of the deceased arising
out of a commercial transaction. It is submitted that there is no agreement
executed by the deceased as alleged in the complaint. It is further submitted
that, demand of repayment of a lawful debt without any pressure or criminal
intent does not attract the offence under Section 108 of BNS. Learned counsel
would further submit that there is no mens rea to commit the alleged offence
and there is no active or direct act on the part of the petitioners/accused Nos.5
and 6 which led the deceased to commit suicide. It is submitted that as seen
from the contents of FIR, the deceased’s extreme step was due to his financial
2025:APHC:41225
difficulties only, but not due to harassment of the Petitioner. Learned counsel
would further submit that recovery of debt or insistence on repayment, in the
absence of element of criminal intimidation, harassment or illegal compulsion,
cannot by itself constitute abetment of suicide.
5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor would submit that though the
deceased was in hospital, the Petitioner along with other Accused humiliated
him demanding the amount. It is submitted that the investigation is at nascent
stage, as such there is every possibility of tampering with the evidence in
case, the Petitioner is granted regular bail. Hence, prayed to dismiss the
petition.
6. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6
pressurized the deceased for repayment of the amount due to him and also
sent Accused Nos.4 to 6 to the house of the deceased, who humiliated the
deceased by demanding the amount. A bare perusal of the material on record
would show that this is a case of abetment to commit suicide alleged to have
been committed by the Petitioner along with other Accused. As rightly put by
the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, there are commercial
transactions between the Petitioner and the deceased as the Petitioner
supplied oil seeds to the deceased on credit basis which is accumulated to an
amount of Rs.11,00,000/-. It is the further contention of the learned counsel
that, no agreement has been obtained by the Petitioner from the deceased.
Whether the alleged act of the Petitioner in demanding the deceased to pay
the amount due to him and sending Accused Nos.4 to 6 to the house of the
2025:APHC:41225
deceased, who humiliated the deceased and the same led to his suicide, is
the factual aspect to be decided during investigation. A plain reading of
Section 108 of BNS, the precedents referred to supra and the contents of the
complaint would disclose that, it is not the stage to decide the culpability of the
Petitioner by accepting the allegations leveled against him. During the course
of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on record
the orders passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.8435 of 2025, dated
16.09.2025 and Criminal Petition No.8940 of 2025, dated 10.09.2025 granting
anticipatory bail to the accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively. In such
circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed granting bail to the
petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6, on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6 shall appear before the concerned
Magistrate Court, within one week from today and shall furnish personal bond
for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties for the like
sum each, to the satisfaction of concerned Magistrate Court;
(ii) The petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6 shall appear before the Station
House Officer, concerned, once in a week i.e., on Sunday between 10.00 a.m.
and 05.00 p.m., until further orders.
(iii) The petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6 shall be available for investigation
as and when required by the Investigating Officer;
2025:APHC:41225
(iv) The petitioners/accused Nos.5 and 6 shall not, directly or indirectly,
make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the
Court or to any Investigating or Police Officer.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________
TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA, J
Date: 03.10.2025
SRT/KNN
2025:APHC:41225
13
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10323/2025
03.10.2025
SRT/KNN
2025:APHC:41225
