High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 04 MP CK 0013

Naval Kishore Sharma vs State of M.P.

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 13 April 2012 · Citation: (2012) ILR (MP) 1444

HON’BLE JUDGES
M.C. Garg, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Rev. No. 1171 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 390 words

M.C. Garg, J.—All these petitions arise out of order of framing of charge against the petitioners u/s 306/34 of IPC based upon suicide note left by the deceased which reads thus:-

Petitioners submit that even if the allegations as made in the suicide note are taken at their face value, they do not constitute abetment under. Section 107 of IPC for the purpose of framing of charge u/s 306 of IPC.

2.

So far as the Government Pleader is concerned while he admits that though suicide note does not make out a case against other petitioners, the suicide note clearly reflects role of the petitioner Naval Kishore Sharma. In so far as withholding the pay of the petitioner is concerned, Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that he was ''the Head Master only one month prior to the date of death of the deceased and thus cannot be fastened with such a serious liability whereas the learned Government Pleader'' submits that besides the suicide note there is also an evidence of Chandrabhan Tripathi who has made statement u/s 161 of Cr.P.C. wherein he has stated as under:-

3.

This statement of Chandrabhan Tripathi corroborates the allegations made by the deceased in his suicide note against the petitioner Naval Kishore Sharma.

4.

The statement of Learned Counsel for the petitioner that Naval Kishore Sharma had taken over the charge as Head Master of the School only one month before the date of death of the deceased would not be a good ground to discharge the petitioner at this stage. This may be a good ground for final judgment but this has to be seen only after trial is completed.

5.

In these circumstances, Criminal Revision No. 1214/2011 filed by petitioner Ramavtar Verma and Criminal Revision No. 1319/2011 filed by petitioner Shailendra Kumar Tripathi are allowed while Criminal Revision No. 1171/2011 filed by petitioner Naval Kishore Sharma is dismissed. It is however made clear that anything stated by this Court while passing this order will not cause any aspersion on the merits of the case.

6.

The bail bonds of petitioners, namely, Ramavtar Verma and Shailendra Kumar Tripathi will stand discharged while petitioner Naval Kishore Sharma will be required to continue appearing before the Trial Court to face the trial. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Trial Court.