Pottavathri Subash vs State Of Telangana And Another

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 641 Tel
Judgement Date : 8 February, 2023

Telangana High Court
Pottavathri Subash vs State Of Telangana And Another on 8 February, 2023
Bench: K.Surender
                                                Crl.Petition No.1290 of 2023
                                  1



      THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

          CRIMINAL PETITION No.1290 OF 2023

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner- Accused No.1 to quash the proceedings against him in PRC No.24 of 2021 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nirmal. The offence alleged against him is under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner - accused No.1 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State. Perused the record.

3. The petitioner is the elder sister's son of 2nd respondent - de facto complainant. The deceased purchased a plot admeasuring 38 x 58 feet from the mother of accused and got it registered in the name of father of accused. After that the deceased decided to take back and asked them to quit the plot. Upon which her sister and this accused refused to give up and started harassing her. About one week prior, they had erected zinc shed, for which an Crl.Petition No.1290 of 2023 2 altercation had taken place and the petitioner abused the deceased in vulgar language, for which reason, the deceased became worried, felt much anxiety and she poured kerosene on her body and set her ablaze on 20.12.2018.

4. On the basis of complaint of 2nd respondent, the police registered a case and file charge sheet for the offence under Section 306 of IPC.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that none of the ingredients under Section 306 of IPC are made out against the petitioner in so far as the allegations are concerned. He relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mariano Anto Bruno and another v. The Inspector of Police1 and argued that to convict a person for the offence under Section 306 of IPC, there has to be proof or direct or indirect acts of incitement which leads the deceased to commit suicide.

6. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the case cannot be quashed at the threshold and trial has to go on.

1 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 834 Crl.Petition No.1290 of 2023 3

7. As seen from the allegations in the complaint, the disputes about the said property were going on over a period of time. There were constant disputes in respect of said property, according to the statements made by the witnesses and also the dying declaration of the deceased. It is the reason for the deceased to commit suicide or is the said land which was claimed by this petitioner and others. In the said circumstances of a continuous dispute over a period of time, it cannot be said that there was no abetment in the present facts. Different people react to situations differently. Constantly, when the deceased was harassed with respect to the land in question, at this juncture, it cannot be said that there is no prima facie case for the offence under Section 306 of IPC.

8. For the said reason, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings against the petitioner and the criminal petition is liable to be dismissed.

9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

_____________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 08.02.2023 rev/tu