AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
SWAPNA JOSHI, J
Rule. Rule, returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for respective parties, the Application is taken up for final hearing, at the
stage of admission itself.
By means of this Application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks quashing the First Information Report in Crime No. 42/2017
dated 12.05.2017 as well as the charge-sheet bearing No.53/2006 dated 18.08.2017 filed by non-applicant no.1-PSO Karanja (Rural) in the Court
learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karanja registered as Regular Criminal Case No. 208/2017 for the offence punishable under section 306 of
IPC.
Few facts giving rise to the instant Application are stated thus:
Complainant/non-applicant no.2-Himmat Motiram Pise is the brother of deceased-Ramabai Balu Dave. He lodged a report on 30th March 2017 that
Ramabai was married with Balu and out of said wedlock, one son and one daughter have begotten. Ramabai's daughter was married. Ramabai was
suffering from mental illness and was taking treatment of Dr. Sujay Patil at Akola. Â She was residing alone at village Chandai, Tq.Karanja,
Dist.Washim. She was separated from her husband since last 20-years. On 30th March 2017, Ramabai left her house so as to attend marriage at
Kamargaon. At about 1.30pm, one Bhagubai went to the complainant and informed that dead body of Ramabai was seen floating in a well. Â On
receipt of this information, the complainant along with Police Patil of the village proceeded near the well and found the dead body of Ramabai in the
well. According to the complainant, few days prior to the incident, Ramabai had gone mad inasmuch as she used to murmur and was not consuming
medicines which were prescribed and due to the said madness of Ramabai, she took the extreme step of committing suicide by jumping into the well.
On 12.5.2017, the complainant lodged  the complaint. On the basis of the said complaint the Police from Karanja Police Station registered a Marg
bearing No.16/2017. Thereafter on 12.5.2017, the complaint was lodged by the complainant-Himmat Pise alleging that the present applicant was
responsible for the death of Ramabai. It was stated that the applicant used to harass Ramabai for establishing physical relationship. It was alleged that
about 15 days prior to the death of Ramabai, she had informed him and his brother Onkar that the applicant had come to her house in the wee hours
and made sexual advances from her. It was alleged that thereafter a meeting was held and in the said meeting the applicant had apologised for his
misdeed and, therefore, no action was taken against him. It was stated by the complainant that Ramabai committed suicide by jumping into the well as
the applicant had instigated her to take the extreme step. In these circumstances, the report came to be lodged by the complainant against the
applicant and the offence was registered u/s 306 IPC. Â
Mr. A.J. Thakkar, learned Advocate for the applicant vehemently argued that the first information report dated 12.5.2017 shows that it is an
afterthought compliant and although the complainant had ample opportunity to make allegations against the culprit, he had not stated anything in the
first complaint dated 30.3.2017. On the contrary, the complainant has stated that few days prior to death of Ramabai her madness had extremely
increased. The complainant has specifically stated in the complaint that Ramabai was mentally challenged woman and was being medically treated by
the Doctor at Akola. Learned Advocate further submitted that now the complainant has come up with a false case that deceased-Ramabai was
residing separately and the applicant used to visit her house during night hours and harass her for establishing physical relationship. He submitted that
the applicant had neither abetted nor instigated deceased-Ramabai to commit suicide and has not committed any act much less an act of abetment to
commit suicide, as alleged. It is stated that the FIR dated 12.5.2017 is totally afterthought and made with intent to falsely rope in the applicant in the
alleged crime.
As against this, the learned APP submitted that prior to death of Ramabai, she had disclosed about the misdeed to the villagers as well as her
brothers. According to learned APP, the applicant used to make physical advances towards Ramabai considering that she was residing alone and
harass her and in this manner he instigated Ramabai to commit suicide.
We have carefully gone through the first information report as well as the charge-sheet. It is noticed that on 30th March 2017 an accidental death
was registered by the police as the complainant had lodged the report stating that as Ramabai was mentally unstable, she used to take medicines
prescribed by the Doctor at Akola. However, few days prior to the incident, she was not consuming medicines and she used to talk irrelevant.
According to the complainant due to the said madness, Ramabai has committed suicide. It is further noticed that after period of more than one-and-a-
half months, the complainant again lodged the complaint on 12.5.2017 alleging that the applicant used to harass Ramabai during night hours for
establishing physical relationship due to which Ramabai was disturbed and she committed suicide. According to the complainant, the applicant
instigated Ramabai to commit suicide.
A bare perusal of the FIR dated 12.5.2017 and the charge-sheet clearly shows that no offence much less an offence punishable u/s. 306 IPC is said
to be made out. We have perused the statements of prosecution witnesses recorded by the investigating agency which show that they were all hear-
say witnesses and, therefore, not admissible as such, under the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act. There is absolutely no evidence on record to
show that at any point of time the applicant either instigated or abeted Ramabai to commit suicide. The report dated 30.3.2017 immediately lodged
after the incident makes it amply clear that Ramabai was suffering from mental illness  and her madness was increased rapidly and in the fit of
madness she committed suicide. In fact, the complaint was belatedly lodged  that too after 45 days i.e. on 12.5.2017 holding the applicant responsible
for the suicide. The statements of the witnesses indicate that 4 to 8 days prior to the incident Ramabai had gone mad and used to talk irrelevant and
that she was not consuming medicines which were prescribed by the Doctor. No doubt, the statements show that about one month prior to the
Ramabai's suicide, she had informed the witnesses that the applicant used to harass her and threatened to kill her. The statement of son of Ramabai,
namely, Prashant Dave shows that when he had visited his mother on 20.3.2017, his mother has informed that the applicant had visited her house one
month back and insisted for establishing physical relationship and threatened her with dire consequences if she discloses about the same to anyone.
The statement further shows that he pacified his mother. It is not clear from the statement of son of Ramabai as to why he has not lodged any
complaint against the applicant at that point of time. The statement of Radha Kale who is the daughter of Ramabai, shows that her mother had
complained against the applicant stating that the applicant had during night time visited the house of her mother in an inebriated condition. On making
enquiry as to why he has come there, he did not reply anything and went away. Her statement further shows that her mother complained that the
applicant under the influence of liquor always used to behave in this manner, therefore her mother was disturbed. It is not clear as to why Radha has
not complained against the applicant if at all he used to behave in this manner and harass her mother. Her statement further shows that the meeting
was held amongst the villagers however the villagers pacified him and the applicant had apologised for his misdeeds and therefore, the matter came to
an end. Thus on going through the entire charge-sheet, we do not find any material to show that the applicant had instigated or abetted Ramabai  to
commit suicide.
We find that Section 306 IPC is not at all attracted in this case. Even if the allegations in the first information report and the charge sheet are
accepted at their face value, we do not find that the applicant instigated and abetted commission of suicide by Ramabai. In any case, instigating any
person to commit suicide would involve mental process. There is no positive act on the part of the applicant to show that he instigated or aided in the
commission of suicide.
An useful reference can be made in the case of M.Mohan vs. State, (represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police) wherein it is held that
abetment involves mental process of instigating or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing and without a positive act on the part of the accused
to instigate or aid in committing suicide, the offence of abetment to commit suicide cannot be made out. It is further observed that there should be a
clear mens rea to commit the offence punishable u/s 306 IPC and  it requires commission of direct or active act by accused which led  deceased
to commit suicide seeing no other option and such act must be intended to push victim into a position that he/she commits suicide. Â If the ratio in the
above said case is applied, the offence u/s 306 IPC cannot be made out against the applicant, on the basis of allegations in the complaint and the
chargesheet , even if the allegations are  accepted at their face value.
In the celebrated case, in the case of State of Haryana  and others vs. Bhajanlal and others, reported in (1992) SCC (Cri) 426,  it is held that
the High Court could exercise the jurisdiciton u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. if it is found that the offence registered against the accused cannot be made out, even
if the allegations made in the FIR are accepted at their face value. In Zandu Pharmaceuticals Works vs. Â Mohd. Sharaful Haque , reported in 2005
(1 )SCC 122, similar view has been expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
In view of the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court and considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it would be necessary
to quash and set aside the first information report registered against the applicant and the charge sheet filed by the respondent no.1 for the offence
punishable u/s 306 IPC as the continuation of the proceedings against the applicant on the basis of said proceedings would result in abuse of process
of the court. In that view of the matter, we proceed to pass the following order:
(a) Criminal Application No. 812/2017 is allowed.
(b) The first information report No. 42/2017 dated 12.05.2017 and the consequent charge-sheet filed  and further proceedings emanating from the
FIR, are hereby quashed and set aside.
(c) Rule made absolute accordingly.