In a relief to accused in the Pratyusha Banerjee suicide case Rahul Raj Singh, the Bombay High Court on Monday granted an anticipatory bail to him after observing that prima facie there was no evidence on record to show that he had abetted Pratyusha’s suicide.
Hearing Rahul’s plea seeking pre—arrest bail, Justice Mridula Bhatkar of the high court stated, “From the statements of witnesses, it is clearly seen that harassment and disputes were there between the applicant accused (Rahul) and the victim (Pratyusha). But prima facie, there is nothing on record to show abetment”.
“For an offence to be made out under section 306 of IPC (abetment to suicide) there should be instigation, intentional aid or an intent that the person should commit suicide. It is necessary to show whether the accused had mens rea (intention),” the judge noted.
While granting anticipatory bail to Rahul, Justice Bhatkar directed Rahul to appear before the Bangurnagar police, who are investigating the case, thrice a week for two weeks.
Averring that harassment or disputes could be a reason for a person to not like another person and take steps to end his or her life, the judge said: “For that person, the behaviour of the other person may be the cause of his or her death. However, for an offence of abetment to be proved, there should be evidence to show instigation, provocation and intention”.
“How a person will react to the situation is unpredictable and sensitivity differs from one person to another. Under such circumstances, unless the intention of the person held responsible for the suicide is brought on record prima facie, it cannot be said that it is abetment,” the judge said.
Earlier in the day, the Judge heard the last telephonic conversation between Rahul and Pratyusha recorded on April 1 an hour before the actress committed suicide.
On April 1, “Balika Badhu” fame Pratyusha (24) was found hanging from a ceiling fan at her seventh floor flat in Harmony residency building at Goregaon in north Mumbai, She was taken by her live-in boyfriend and TV producer Rahul Raj Singh to Kokilaben Ambani Hospital, where she was declared dead on admission later that evening.
Alluding to the last conversation that she had heard in her chamber earlier in the day, Justice Bhatkal said: “Throughout the conversation, the applicant accused is asking the victim (Pratyusha) not to take any drastic steps and assured her that he would return home immediately. After perusing all the facts of the case, this court is prima facie of the view that the police can investigate the case without any custodial interrogation of the accused”.
Rejecting the Prosecution’s argument that it was “confused” on whether to invoke murder charges against Rahul, the Judge said: “The Prosecution’s argument that they are suspicious and may want to invoke section 302 of IPC against the accused cannot be appreciated at this stage”.
Seeking Rahul’s custody for interrogation, Special Public Prosecutor Nilesh Pawaskar said that the investigators were considering if the murder charges were to be invoked against Rahul in the case.
“We are confused and still seeing if section 302 of IPC is applicable. The probe has revealed that the accused is a drug addict. We want to see if he is also a peddler and had administered drugs to the victim. Several other girls have approached the police saying that they had been duped in the past by Rahul,” Pawaskar said.
The prosecutor also told the court that the police was also probing if Rahul coerced Pratyusha to abort her pregnancy.
Holding that the investigators did not need Rahul’s custody to invoke section 302 (murder) of IPC in the case, the Judge wondered: “Why is the police complicating the caseIJ Right now, the offence registered against the accused is under section 306 for abetment. Show me the evidence for this section. Show me mens rea (intention), instigation and facilitation”..
Making a strong case for anticipatory bail for his bail, Rahul’s lawyer Abaad Ponda told the court that his client had no role to play in Pratyusha committing suicide.
“Rahul and Pratyusha were happy with each other and had even partied together the night before Pratyusha committed suicide On April 1, Rahul had gone out in the afternoon to bring lunch when Pratyusha called him. Rahul berated her for drinking in the day time and told her that he would return soon,” Ponda told the court.
Alluding to Pratyusha’s post-mortem report, Ponda said: “The post—mortem report also suggests that Pratyusha committed suicide and that it was not murder”.
It may be recalled that the post-mortem, conducted on Pratyusha’s body, had initially ruled out any foul play in the actress’ alleged suicide. However, on April 5, the Bangurnagar police went ahead and booked registered a case against Rahul under sections 306 (abetment to suicide), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC.
On their part, Pratyusha’s parents have accused Rahul of having “mentally and physically” tortured their daughter, leading to the latter ending her life.