Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
S.B. : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.C. SINHO
M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009
Smt. Asha Singh Gaharwar
-Vs.-
State of Madhya Pradesh
Counsel for the Applicant : Shri Ashok Tiwari Advocate.
Counsel for the respondent/ : Shri L.D.S. Baghel, Deputy
State Government Advocate.
ORDER
(18/06/2009)
The applicant has filed this petition under section 482 of
Cr.P.C for the quashment of criminal proceedings pending
before IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Katni in S.T. No. 38/05
for the offence punishable under section 306/34 of IPC arising
out of the crime no. 574/04 registered at police station Katni.
2. In brief the prosecution case is that on 21/09/04 at Katni
Civil Line, five persons namely Kishori Lal Gupta, Maya Bai
w/o Kishori Lal, Monika D/o Kishori Lal, Renuka D/o Kishori
Lal and Mayank S/o Kishori Lal committed suicide by
consuming some poisonous substance. The matter was
Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009
reported to the police station Katni on which basis a merg was
recorded. During inquiry of merg it was found that these five
persons died by consuming some poisonous substance and
their visras were sent for chemical examination to the
Forensic Science Laboratory. During investigation, a suicidal
note, alleged to be written by deceased Kishori Lal has was
seized where it is alleged that due to the recovery
proceedings initiated by Oriental Commerce Bank for the
recovery of loan amount which he has taken from the bank
concerned, in that recovery proceedings his house was
wrongly auctioned by the recovery officer Nahida Khatoon,
Naib Tahsildar. It is further alleged that the other co-accused
as well as applicant Asha Singh Gaharwar have insulted him
with regard to the aforesaid recovery proceedings initiated by
recovery officer hence, Kishorilal and his family members
have committed suicide. On the basis of suicidal note, police
has registered a case under section 306 of IPC against the
applicant and other co-accused persons. After due
investigation, a charge sheet has been filed which is pending
Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009
presently before the Additional Sessions Judge, Katni.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid charge sheet, this petition under
section 482 of the Cr.P.C has been filed for quashment of
criminal proceedings initiated by the police station Katni.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that
this Court in M.Cr.C. Nos. 8451/2005, 8453/2005 and
1336/2006 has already quashed the proceedings against
other co-accused namely Suresh Kumar Gupta, Prakash and
Satyapal Grover and thus, the criminal proceedings against
the present applicant should also be quashed on similar
grounds.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the applicant as well
as the Government Advocate for the State.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant Shri Tiwari submits
that there is not an iota of evidence on record on which basis
the necessary ingredients for the offence punishable u/s 306
of IPC is made out against the applicant. Learned counsel
further argued that in M.Cr.C. No. 8451/2005 proceedings
against other four accused persons have already been
Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009
quashed and applicant has similar case as of other co-
accused.
6. In order to implicate a person under Section 306/34 of
IPC there should be some material against the said persons
that they have abetted the deceased to commit suicide. The
term “Abetted of a thing” has been defined in Section 107, IPC
which reads thus :
“107. Abetment of a thing :- A person abets
the doing of a thing; or
First – Instigates any person to do that
things; or
Secondly – engages with one or more
other person or persons in any conspiracy for
the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal
omission takes place in pursuance of that
conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that
thing; or
Thirdly – intentionally aids, by any act or
illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1- A person who, by wilful
misrepresentation, or by concealment of a
material fact which he is bound to disclose,
voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to
cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said
to instigate the doing of that thing.
Explanation 2- Whoever, either prior to
or at the time of the commission of offence of
an act, does anything in order to facilitates the
common of that act, and thereby facilitates the
Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of
that act.”
7. If the provisions of Section 107 IPC is read in
juxtaposition of the material available on record, it would
reveal that the entire emphasis has been putforth by the
prosecution against the present applicants are that
deceased’s wife Sapna was not prepared to live with him
therefore, deceased has committed the suicide.
8. By taking the shelter under the umbrella of following
decisions of the Apex Court, learned counsel for the
applicants has placed reliance on these authorities :-
8-I. In State of West Bengal vs. Orilal Jaiswal and
another AIR 1994 SC 1418 dealing with offence under
section 306/34 IPC the Apex Court held as under:
“The Court should be extremely careful
in assessing the facts and circumstances of
each case and the evidence adduced in the
trial for the purpose of finding whether the
cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact
induced her to end the life by committing
suicide. It is transpires to the Court that a
victim committing suicide was hyper sensitive
to ordinary petulance dischord and difference
in domestic life quite common to the society
to which the victim belonged and such
petulance dischord and difference were not
expected to induce a similarly circumstanced
individual in a given society to commit
suicide, the conscience of the Court should
not be satisfied for basing a finding that the
Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009accused charged of abetting the offence of
suicide should be found guilty.”
8-II. In Padmabai v. State of MP 1987
Cri.L.J.1573 it has been held:
“It is of the essence of the crime of
abetment of suicide that the abettor
should be proved to have substantially
assisted in a commission of the offence
of suicide. Investigation,
incitement,provocation,encouragement,
insinuation, solicitation, which words
connote different meanings are, no
doubt, some of the acts, which may
constitute an ‘abetment’ for commission
of suicide. But all such acts or any of
them have to be positive and potent in
nature, of such a degree, that the direct
result of such acts may be none other,
but the commission of suicide.
Stray domestic quarrels,
perfunctory abuses by mother-in-law, to
her daughter-in-law in the Indian Society,
crude and uncultured behaviour by the
‘in-laws’ or the husband towards his wife
being mundane matters of normal
occurrence in the traditional joint Hindu
families, will not go to form and constitute
‘abetment’ unless these acts or conduct
singly or cumulatively, are found to be of
such formidable and compelling nature
as may lead to the commission of suicide
or may facilitate in a singular and prime
manner, the commission of the same.”
8-III. In Mahendra Singh vs. State of MP 1995
Supp.(3)SCC 731 the appellant was charged for an offence
Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009
under Section306/34 IPC basically based upon the dying
declaration of the deceased, which reads as under:
“My mother-in-law and husband and
sister-in-law (husband’s elder brother’s wife)
harassed me. They beat me and abused me.
My husband Mahendra wants to marry a
second time. He has illicit connections with my
sister-in-law. Because of these reason and
being harassed I want to die by burning.”
Hon’ble Apex Court considering the definition of
‘abetment’ u/s 107 IPC found that the charge and conviction of
the appellant for an offence u/s 306/34 is not sustainable
merely on the allegation of harassment to the deceased.
Because none of the ingredients of abetment are attracted on
the statement of deceased.
8-IV. In Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhatisgarh
2001(9) SCC 618 Apex Court while considering the charge
and conviction for an offence u/s 306/34 IPC on the basis of
dying declaration recorded by an Executive Magistrate were
she stated that previously there had been quarrel between the
deceased and her husband and on the day of occurrence she
had a quarrel with her husband who had said that she could
go anywhere she wanted to go and thereafter she had poured
kerosene on herself and had set fire. Acquitting the accused
Apex Court held :
” A word uttered in a fit of anger or
emotion without intending the consequences
to actually follow can not be said to be
Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009instigation. If it transpires to the court that a
victim committing suicide was hypersensitive
or ordinary petulance, discord and
differences in domestic life quite common to
the society to which the victim belonged and
such petulance, discord and differences were
not expected to induce a similarly
circumstances individual in given society to
commit suicide, the conscience of the court
should not be satisfied for basing a finding
that the accused charged of abetting the
offence of suicide should be found guilty.”
9. I have gone through the FIR, merg report alongwith
suicidal note of Kishorilal as well as statements recorded u/s
161 of Cr.P.C.
10. Looking to the suicidal note as well as other statements
of prosecution witnesses it cannot be said that deceased
committed suicide due to abetment by applicant hence no
case is made out against applicant on whose basis prima
facie a charge u/s 306 of IPC can be framed against the
applicant. In such circumstances, the entire criminal
proceedings registered against the applicant is liable to be
quashed.
Page numbers M.Cr.C. No. 4705/2009 11. In the result, this petition is allowed. The criminal
proceedings pending against the applicant before the
Additional Sessions Judge, Katni in S.T. No. 38/05 for the
offence punishable under section 306 of IPC is hereby
quashed. A copy of this order be sent to the trial court for
information and compliance.
(S.C. Sinho)
Judge
nn