Telangana High Court
Vadiampudi Varalaxmi , Laxmi And 2 ... vs The State Of Telangana And Another on 8 April, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7030 OF 2022
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in P.R.C.No.332 of 2020, on the file of the learned IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC').
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/de facto complainant lodged a complaint before the Police, Chikkadpally Rural Police Station, Hyderabad, against the petitioners stating that the deceased was her husband. Since he is facing financial problems and unable to pay his debts, he took loan from the petitioners and from the banks. The deceased was paying three rupees interest every month to the petitioners. In spite of that they are frequently calling the deceased for more money than the interest paid. Because of the unbearable harassment, the deceased committed suicide by consuming poison. Basing on the said complaint, the Police registered a case in Crime No.157 of 2018 for the 2 SKS,J Crl.P.No.7030 of 2022 offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC and after completion of investigation, they filed charge sheet before the IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.
3. Heard Sri C. Sharan Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State. Though notice served upon respondent No.2, none appeared on his behalf.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that initially the case was registered for the offence under Section 174 of Cr.P.C, whereas, the witnesses deposed that the deceased committed suicide due to the financial problems. After two months, the Police improvised their statements stating that due to unbearable harassment of the petitioners only the deceased committed suicide. The statement of witnesses clearly proves the intention of respondent No.2 to avoid payment to the petitioners and as such, she filed the complaint.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners are vague and there is no evidence to prove that the petitioners harassed 3 SKS,J Crl.P.No.7030 of 2022 the deceased due to which he committed suicide. Learned counsel further submitted that without proper investigation, police filed charge-sheet. Therefore, prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.
6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged allegation shows that the petitioners harassed the deceased, due to which, the deceased committed suicide. Whether the harassment amounts to instigation requires trial. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that the offence under Section 306 of IPC does not constitute. Hence, prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.
7. Having regard to the rival submissions made by both the learned counsel and having gone through the material available on record, to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, the Court has to see whether the averments in the complaint prima facie shows that it constitute the offence as alleged by the Police.
8. At this stage, it is pertinent to note the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. 4 SKS,J Crl.P.No.7030 of 2022 Surendra Kori 1, wherein in paragraph No.14 it is held as follows:
"The High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not function as a Court of appeal or revision. This Court has, in several judgments, held that the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., though wide, has to be used sparingly, carefully and with caution. The High Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of wide magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material."
9. Section 306 of the IPC reads as under:
"306. Abetment of suicide:- If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."1
(2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155 5 SKS,J Crl.P.No.7030 of 2022
10. To prove the offence under Section 306 of IPC, the prosecution has to prove that the deceased committed suicide due to the abetment of the petitioner/accused. Section 107 of IPC defines abetment to mean that a person abets the doing of a thing, if he, firstly, instigates any person to do that thing; secondly, engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing; thirdly, by an act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
11. In the present case, there were disputes between the petitioners and the deceased. The complaint and the statement of the witnesses reveal that even the deceased was paying the loan amount which was taken for three rupees interest on principal amount per month, the petitioners called the deceased for more money than the interest paid. Therefore, due to unbearable harassment the deceased committed suicide. Whether the conduct of the petitioners constitutes an offence or whether it amounts to instigation under Section 107 of the IPC, can be decided at the time of trial only.
12. In view of the above discussion as well as the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya 6 SKS,J Crl.P.No.7030 of 2022 Pradesh (Supra), this Court does not find any merit in the criminal petition to quash the proceedings against the petitioners and the same is liable to be dismissed.
13. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_____________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 08.04.2024 SAI