Sugandhan v. The State Rep By

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No.511 of 2023 registered by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 306 of IPC.

2. The petitioner is working as Field Line Officer(Collection) with L & T Finance Limited at Mayiladuthurai. It is stated that the deceased, had borrowed a sum to avail loan of Rs.32,000/- and had agreed to repay the same together with interest at 25% in 11 monthly instalments.

3. It is also stated that the petitioner herein was the person who collected the instalments on behalf of the L & T Finance Limited. The petitioner had gone over for collection on 06.12.2023 at 9.00 a.m.

4. It is the case of the prosecution as stated by the defacto complainant that the deceased was there in the house and there was a demand for payment of the monthly instalments, which the learned Senior Counsel stated was just Rs.1,850/-. Let me at this moment state that it could be just Rs.1,850/- for an individual, but that amount, would be a substantial amount in the hand of anybody else.

1/4

5. Therefore, the quantum of the amount is immaterial. The agony which the deceased would have gone through in repaying, which according to the learned Senior Counsel its just Rs.1,850/- is more important. 6.It is the very specific case as seen by the First Information Report that the petitioner herein had parked himself in the house and it is also stated that the deceased had gone around to other houses seeking money from various persons and thereafter have repaid the money. That she had paid the amount is shown as one factor, which according to the learned Senior Counsel should be in favour of the petitioner herein. It is stated that having paid the amount there was no reason for her to suffer any more and therefore, it is stated that the petitioner should not be held responsible for the suicide of the deceased. It is also alleged that there could be other causes and that it could be that the deceased borrowed monies from several other institutions and other sources and that the defacto complainant's husband is a drunkard.

7. Yarns can always be spun but there should be respect for human life. There cannot be any allegations of conduct not only against those who are dead but also against those who are alive.

8. It is the case of the respondent that on that particular date on 06.12.2023, the petitioner herein had gone over to the house of the deceased 2/4

and had refused to go out till the instalment is paid and that the deceased had gone over to various houses seeking the money and had thereafter, paid the money and owing to that experience, had committed suicide.

9. Investigation will have to be done as to what actually transpired. This cannot be done in the absence of the accused or the accused absconding from judicial process. He has to submit himself to the judicial process.

10. Taking all factors into consideration, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

11. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 15.12.2023 rjr 3/4

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

rjr 15.12.2023 4/4