Bombay High Court
Manisha Shashikant Bhalerao vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ... on 22 August, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
2208apl323.17-Judgment 1/6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 323 OF 2017
APPLICANT :- Manisha Shashikant Bhalerao, Aged about
34 years, Occ. Household, R/o Tar Colony,
Sunderkhed, Buldana.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- 1] State of Maharashtra, through Police Station
Officer, Police Station Ganeshpeth, Nagpur.
2] Sou. Vaishali Ranjitsingh Rajput, Aged about
31 years, Occ. Service, R/o Chatrapati
Nagar, Ward No.1, Malkapur Road,
Buldana, District Buldana.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. R.J.Shinde, counsel for the applicant.
Mr.P.S.Tembhare, Additional Public Prosecutor
for the non-applicant/respondent No.1.
Mr.Nilesh Kalwaghe, counsel for the non-applicant/respondent No.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
M. G. GIRATKAR
, JJ.
DATED : 22.08.2017
O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per : Smt.Vasanti A Naik, J.)
The criminal application is admitted and heard finally at
the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the
parties.
2208apl323.17-Judgment 2/6
2. By this criminal application, the applicant seeks the
quashing and setting aside of the first information report bearing
No.226 of 2015 registered against the applicant for the offence
punishable under section 306 read with 34 of the Penal Code.
3. The non-applicant No.2, who is the sister of deceased
Santosh, who has expired on 27/05/2011, lodged a report in the police
station that the applicant and her brother Santosh were acquainted with
each other and they were involved in physical relationship. It is alleged
in the report that a suicide note written by Santosh was received by the
members of his family by post after his death and in the said suicide
note written by Santosh, it was stated that applicant Manisha had
prepared a video clip of Santosh of the applicant being involved in a
physical relationship and that the applicant was blackmailing Santosh
that if he did not give money as per her demand, she would make the
video clip public. It is alleged in the report lodged by the non-applicant
No.2 that due to the demand and the threats given by the applicant that
she would expose the video clip, Santosh had committed suicide on
27/05/2011. On the basis of the report lodged by the non-applicant
No.2-the sister of Santosh, the first information report was registered
against the applicant.
2208apl323.17-Judgment 3/6
4. Shri Shinde, the learned counsel for the applicant,
submitted that even if the allegations in the report filed by the non-
applicant No.2 and in the suicide note allegedly written by Santosh are
accepted at their face value, prima facie an offence punishable under
section 306 of the Penal Code cannot be made out against the applicant.
It is stated that on the basis of the report lodged by the non-applicant
No.2 and the material available with the non-applicant No.1, it cannot
be said that the applicant had abetted the commission of the suicide by
Santosh. It is submitted by placing reliance on the judgments of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in (2011) 3 SCC 626 (M. Mohan v.
State) and (2002) 5 SCC 371 (Sanju v. State of M.P.) and the
judgment of this court reported in 2014 ALL MR (Cri.) 1216 (Binod
Ratan Sarkar v. State of Maharashtra) that if prima facie an offence
under section 306 of the Penal Code cannot be made out on the basis of
the complaint and the allegations in the first information report, the
first information report is liable to be quashed and set aside. It is
submitted that it is held in the judgment in the case of M. Mohan v.
State (supra) that there should be a clear mens rea to commit an offence
punishable under section 306 of the Penal Code. It is submitted that
from the material available on record, it cannot be said that there was
any instance whatsoever, of instigation attributable to the applicant for
the commission of suicide by Santosh.
2208apl323.17-Judgment 4/6
5. Shri Tembhare, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the non-applicant No.1 and Shri Kalwhage, the learned
counsel for the non-applicant No.2, submitted that the applicant was
torturing Santosh by extorting money from him with the threat that she
would release the video clip showing the applicant and deceased
Santosh in a physical relationship. It is submitted that on the basis of
the report lodged by the non-applicant No.2 and the suicide note of
Santosh, the first information report was registered against the
applicant.
6. We have perused the report lodged by the non-applicant
No.2-the sister of Santosh as also the suicide note allegedly written by
Santosh. The first information report is based only on the said material.
On the basis of the report and the suicide note, it cannot be said that
the applicant was involved in direct or indirect act of incitement to the
commission of suicide by Santosh. If the applicant was allegedly
involved in extortion or was threatening Santosh that she would make
the video clip public, some other offence could have been made out
against the applicant at the relevant time but the offence under section
306 of the Penal Code could not have been registered against her. It is
held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M. Mohan v. State
(supra) that there should be a clear mens rea to commit an offence
2208apl323.17-Judgment 5/6
punishable under section 306 of the Penal Code. It is held in the said
judgment that there should be some instances of instigation attributable
to the person against whom the allegation of commission of the offence
punishable under section 306 of the Penal Code are made out and the
commission of direct or active act by the accused which leads the
deceased to commit suicide seeing no other option is required. Intention
or mens rea is necessary for constituting abetment under section 107 of
the Penal Code. Since abetment involves the mental process of
instigating or intentionally aiding a person in doing a thing and since on
scanning the material on which the first information report is
registered, it cannot be said that the applicant had instigated, conspired
or intentionally aided the suicide of Santosh, the first information report
could not have been registered against the applicant. In the instant case,
the ingredients of the offence punishable under section 306 of the Penal
Code cannot be made out on the basis of the report lodged by the non-
applicant No.2 and the suicide note allegedly written by Santosh. Also,
it is worthwhile to note that though Santosh had committed suicide on
27/05/2011, the first information report is registered four years later.
In the circumstances of the case, by following the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court and this court from time to time, it would be
necessary to quash and set aside the first information report registered
against the applicant.
2208apl323.17-Judgment 6/6
8. Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the criminal application
is allowed. The first information report bearing No.226 of 2015
registered against the applicant for the offence punishable under section
306 of the Penal Code is hereby quashed and set aside. Order
accordingly.
JUDGE JUDGE
KHUNTE
