Bombay high court gives relief to restaurant owner duo in suicide abetment case; points pandemic’s grim i – Times of India

MUMBAI: Observing that a suicide case of a man running a hotel paints an “unfortunate and grim’’ picture of the havoc wrought by the Covid-19 pandemic on the restaurant industry, the Bombay high court granted interim pre-arrest bail to a duo who owned the business.
Though a suicide note accused them of pressurising him to die by suicide, prima facie, this was one instance of how a common man has suffered on account of the economic and social disruption caused by the pandemic and particularly, those in the hospitality business, when millions of restaurants/small hotels suffered financial distress and left their owners, staff, employees, lost their productive assets during the lockdown, said Justice Bharati Dangre of the HC, in her order.
“The year 2020 and to some extent, the year 2021 has been a challenging year that no one could have predicted would turn out in the manner in which it did,’’ said Justice Dangre. She said the outbreak sent economic shock waves globally and its impact extended beyond an international health crisis.
“The economic effects of the pandemic in India, led to the reduction in economic activities, subsequently forcing businesses to scale or shut down their operations. It impacted many individuals, families, enterprises being affected due to a sharp rise in unemployment. Millions of enterprises face an existential threat,’’ she observed.
Amongst various sectors, the Indian hotel industry has been significantly impacted as demand is at an all-time low, said the HC but added, “The pandemic has wreaked havoc on the restaurant industry but it hasn’t ended it.’’
The duo who owned a suburban restaurant near Mumbai petitioned the HC after their plea for anticipatory bail in an abetment to suicide case was rejected by a lower court. There was an understanding over profit share, the HC said, though not in the form of an agreement.
The man who ran the hotel died by suicide on July 15. His widow lodged the FIR. She alleged that after the lockdown imposed last year, business “reached its nadir’’ and her husband was unable to meet persistent demands of his share of money made by the accused but he managed to arrange for Rs 2.5 lakh for renewal of the restaurant licence.
The accused showed the HC a receipt from Superintendent of state excise Palghar of a licence fee for 6.85 lakh to which they too have contributed, along with him, as they want to keep the restaurant running.
The HC said, the case requires investigation but custodial interrogation is not needed in the “unfortunate and unprecedented’’ situation as the owner-duo “cannot be completely held responsible for the economic crisis’’ and them seeking their share from the deceased.
In an ad-interim order on August 12, the HC granted them pre-arrest bail on a personal release (PR) bond of Rs 25,000 directing them to report to the police station every Thursday for three weeks and posted the matter for further hearing on September 3.