Suraj Harpal vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Sinha, CJ

The instant CRMP has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS with the following prayer :-

A) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly quash and set-a-side the F.I.R. No. 10/2025, Dated: 13/01/2025, for the offences u/s 108, 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 registered with P.S. Rajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh, in the interest of Justice.

B) That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire charge-sheet for the offences u/s 108, 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 filed against the petitioners on dated 08/04/2025 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh, in the interest of justice.

C) That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the order and charge dated 10/06/2025 whereby the Ld. Second Additional Sessions Judge, Balod, District Balod in Session trial no. 30/2025 has taken the cognizance and framed charges.

D) That any other relief Hon'ble Court deems feet may also be granted.

Facts of the case is that on 03.01.2025, an intimation was received at Police Station Rajhara from Arogya Hospital, Dalli Rajhara, through one Devprasad, that the deceased Maya Harpal, wife of Petitioner No. 1, resident of Ward No. 23, Dalli Rajhara, had been brought dead to the hospital at about 08:27 p.m. The said intimation was accompanied by a hospital memo requesting necessary action. On the basis of above intimation, the report was lodged and investigation was carried out and on investigation it was found out that the deceased was harassed by her in-laws and husband over domestic issues and subjected to taunts and further on a dispute regarding brother-in-law of petitioner No. 2 luring minor sister of the deceased, the deceased out of pressure committed suicide.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner No. 1 is the husband of the deceased and petitioner No. 2 is the brother-in-law (jeth) of the deceased. It is argued that the marriage of petitioner No. 1 and deceased was solemnized by way of court marriage in the year 2022 and thereafter in January, 2023 the function was celebrated socially according to the rituals. It is further argued that there was no occasion for petitioner No. 1 to persuade the deceased to commit suicide as they had love marriage. As far as petitioner No. 2 is concerned, it is alleged that minor sister of deceased left with brother-in-law of petitioner No. 2 namely Akash and because of the incident there was a dispute between the families and petitioner No. 2 used to threaten the deceased not to lodge any report of the incident. He further argued that no evidence has been collected against the petitioners during the investigation that the petitioners instigated the deceased for committing suicide. He also submits that the petitioners are already on bail. He further prays for quashment of the FIR, charge sheet and further proceedings.

Per Contra, learned State counsel would oppose the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He would submit in the case in hand the charge-sheet has already been filed before the concerned competent court and charges have been already framed hence, the charge sheet cannot be quashed at this juncture.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

Prima-facie, perusal of the documents shows that the deceased was pressurized by the petitioners not to lodge report of the incident wherein the brother-in-law of petitioner No. 2 namely Akash has enticed the minor sister of the deceased. It is also apparent that the deceased was harassed and insulted because of the dispute between the families.

Considering the fact that the evidence which has been collected during the investigation that the deceased committed suicide due to harassment caused to her by the petitioner No.1 and his brother and as the charge sheet has already been filed and the charges have also been framed, at this stage, this court found that it is not a fit case where any interference can be made by this court. Therefore, this Court does not find any good ground to quash the charge sheet. However, it is obligatory that the trial be brought to a logical end expeditiously.

In that view of the matter, the CRMP is dismissed, at motion stage itself.