Ahmedabad: A sessions court here on Saturday refused to discharge a money lender from the criminal charges of abetment of suicide after the borrower died by consuming poison two years ago in a village of Ahmedabad district.According to the case details, the accused is Pravin Rabari, against whom an FIR was registered with Dholka Rural police in 2024 for abetment of suicide and other charges under provisions of the BNS and the Gujarat Money Lenders Act. It said that Rabari had allegedly advanced Rs 20 lakh as loan to Jayesh Panchal in Badarkha village without having a valid money-lending licence. The interest rate was high and Rabari allegedly continued making aggressive demands even after the principal and interest amounts were repaid. Panchal faced sustained telephonic pressure, threats and harassment, and he consumed poison on Oct 16, 2024, and died two days later during treatment.Rabari sought discharge under Section 250 of the BNSS, arguing that the chargesheet material did not disclose his involvement and that abetment could not be established. The complainant opposed the plea, citing seized materials including a suicide note and a mobile video in which the deceased allegedly named the accused and referred to harassment and monetary demands.After the hearing and perusal of record, additional sessions judge at Ahmedabad Rural Court P N Navin rejected Rabari’s application and stated, “It is required to note that, before committing suicide, the deceased recorded a video on his mobile phone wherein he explicitly explained his cause of committing suicide i.e. due to the constant harassment and demands for more money by the present applicant and the other absconding accused. The FIR, chargesheet and supporting evidences clearly emphasise the nature of the offence where the deceased took the drastic action of ending his life due to continuous harassment, leaving behind a suicide note as well as a mobile video naming the accused persons, including the present applicant.”The court said, “In the present case, the evidence produced by the prosecution along with chargesheet as well as police papers clearly shows prima facie reasonable base to believe that the applicant-accused is involved in the present offence.”
