Bombay High Court
Yadav S/O Yeshwant Palaskar And ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 1 November, 2017
Bench: Prasanna B. Varale
1 APL513.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 513 OF 2016
APPLICANTS : 1] Yadav S/o Yeshwant Palaskar,
Aged about 48 years,
Occu. Block Development Officer,
Panchayat Samiti, Malegaon,
District Washim.
2] Kailash S/o Vishwasrao Ghuge,
Aged about 48 years,
Occupation : Block Development Officer,
R/o Panchayat Samittee, Malegaon,
District Washim
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS: 1] State of Maharashtra,
through Officer in Charge of Police Station,
Washim City, Tal. & Dist. Washim.
2] Baban S/o Waman Shelke,
Aged about 32 years,
R/o Kamathwada, Tah. & Dist. Washim.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. S. D. Chande, Advocate for the applicants.
Mrs. S.S. Jachak, A.P.P. for non-applicant no.1
Mr. R. J. Shinde, Advocate for non-applicant no.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE and
ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATE : NOVEMBER 01, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT
2 APL513.16.odt
1] Heard Shri Chande, learned counsel for the applicants,
Mrs. Jachak, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for non-
applicant no.1 State and Shri Shinde, the learned counsel for non-
applicant no.2.
2] ADMIT.
3] By this application under Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, the applicants are before this Court seeking
quashment of first information report registered against them vide
Crime No. 82/2016 dated 10.03.2016 at Police Station, Washim City,
Washim for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian
Penal Code.
4] Mr. Chande, the learned counsel for the applicants invited
our attention to the first information report and submitted that the
report refers to death of brother of informant/complainant namely,
Sanjay Waman Shelke. He states in the report that the information
was received on mobile phone through his nephew Sairam Pandit
Shelke and then it refers to a chit found near the dead body of
Sanjay, stating that he was subjected to ill-treatment at the instance
3 APL513.16.odt
of Extension officer Shri Ghuge. Then, the report refers to the
allegation that deceased Sanjay used to tell the family members that
his senior officers, more particularly the applicants i.e. Extension
Officer Shri Palaskar and Extension Officer Shri Ghuge always used
to ill-treat him and he was fed up with the ill-treatment and resorted
to end his life by committing suicide.
5] Shri Chande, the learned counsel for the applicants
vehemently submitted that the applicants entered in the service of
Zilla Parishad initially at some subordinate level and then with their
hard work, they were promoted to the post of Extension Officer. The
learned counsel then submitted that applicant no.2 Shri Ghuge, with
his utmost sincerity and hard work, was also awarded with apprising
certificates. The learned counsel then submitted that only due to
grudge, the deceased implicated these applicants as abetors for his
act of suicide. The learned counsel then submitted that though, the
reply filed by the non-applicant no.1/State refers to conclusion of
investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the material as referred
to in the reply is wholly insufficient to make out any case against the
applicants, least to connect these applicants for calling a criminal
action under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code against them.
4 APL513.16.odt
6] Shri Chande, the learned counsel for the applicants then
submitted that insofar as applicant no.1 is concerned, it is only by
way of an oral allegation reflected in the report that he was
responsible for the alleged ill-treatment caused to the deceased. He
submitted that the so called suicide note refers to applicant no.2, that
too on a vague allegation that applicant no.2 was harassing the
deceased. The learned counsel invited our attention to a certificate,
dated 12/14.4.2002, issued by the President of Zilla Parishad,
Washim to applicant no.2 when he was Secretary of Gram Panchayat
village Vanoja, and submitted that applicant no.2 was active in
Gram Swachhata Abhiyan and was encouraging the villagers for their
participation in these government schemes. His effort was
appreciated because the said village was awarded first prize at
Divisional level. Thus, the submission of the learned counsel was
applicant nos.1 and 2 were taking active interest in the welfare of the
village and were discharging their duties with sincerity.
7] Shri Chande, the learned counsel for the applicants then
submitted that deceased Sanjay was carrying a grudge against the
applicants because in an enquiry proceeding it revealed that the
5 APL513.16.odt
deceased, who was acting as a Secretary of the Gram Panchayat,
misled to the members of the enquiry committee. He stated that in
the said enquiry, deceased took contrary stands and changed the
same from time to time and as such, the President of the Zilla
Parishad passed an order to initiation an action against deceased for
his dereliction in duties. The learned counsel then submitted that
because of this order, deceased was carrying a grudge against the
applicants and there was no personal animus of present applicants
against the deceased. Thus, it was the submission of the learned
counsel for the applicants that only on baseless allegations, which are
farfetched and the material in the report itself being too inadequate
to call for any action against the applicants, initiation of the criminal
proceedings against the applicants and its further continuation is
nothing but an abuse of process of law.
8] Shri Chande, the learned counsel then submitted that in
view of the settled guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of
Haryana and others .vs. Bhajan Lal and others (1992 Supp (1) SCC
335), continuation of such proceedings against the applicants, which
is an abuse of process of law, is required to be quashed and set aside.
The learned counsel also placed heavy reliance on the judgments of
6 APL513.16.odt
Division Bench of this Court, reported in 2017 All M.R. (Cri) 1869
in the case of Rajendrakumar Bajranglal Sharma and others .vs.
State of Maharashtra and another ; 2017 All M.R. (Cri) 1829 in
the case of Sopan Angadrao Akele .vs. State of Maharashtra and
another ; and the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in
(2010) 8 Supreme Court Cases 628 in the case of Madan Mohan
Singh .vs. State of Gujarat and another.
9] Mrs. Jachak, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
non-applicant no.1 State and Mr. Shinde, learned counsel for non-
applicant no.2 oppose the application.
10] The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that
the investigating agency has collected certain material and also
recorded the statements of witnesses, which support the case of the
complainant/informant.
11] On the backdrop of rival submissions of the learned
counsel for the respective parties, we have gone through the material
on record.
7 APL513.16.odt
12] On a perusal of the material, more particularly the order
passed by the President of Zilla Parishad, dated 09.2.2016, wherein
the President issued direction to initiate an action against deceased
Sanjay Shelke, we find considerable merit in the submission of the
learned counsel for the applicants that deceased Sanjay was carrying
grudge against these applicants, who were only discharging their
official duty. There is nothing placed on record so as to suggest that
the applicants were having any personal animus against the deceased
the learned counsel for the applicants was justified in submitting that
continuation of the proceedings against present applicants, who were
acting in their official capacity, would be nothing but an abuse of
process of law.
13] The learned counsel for the applicants was also justified
in placing reliance on the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court as
well as the Division Bench of this Court, cited supra. It may be useful
to refer to the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Madan
Mohan Singh's case (supra), more particularly paragraph 10 thereof,
which reads thus -
"10. We are convinced that there is absolutely
nothing in this suicide note or the FIR which would
8 APL513.16.odt
even distantly be viewed as an offence much less under
Section 306, IPC. We could not find anything in the
FIR or in the so-called suicide note which could be
suggested as abetment to commit suicide. In such
matters there must be an allegation that the accused
had instigated the deceased to commit suicide or
secondly, had engaged with some other person in a
conspiracy and lastly, that the accused had in any way
aided any act or illegal omission to bring about the
suicide."
14. It will also be useful to refer to the observations of the
Division Bench judgment of this Court in Sopan Angadrao Akele's case
(supra), more particularly paragraphs 22, 23 and 24 thereof, which
read thus -
"22. In the case of Tushar s/o Mahadeorao Arsul
2013 All MR (Cri) 1243 (supra), the Division of the
Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, in para 6
of the Judgment observed that :
"We are of the considered view that the act or
acts of accused to insult do not by themselves
constitute abetment. It has to be shown from a
statement in the complaint that these accused
have actually instigated and aided in the victim's
act of committing suicide. In absence of any such
description, the FIR is liable to be viewed as a text
which does not contain the ingredients of
offence."
23. In the case of Dilip s/o Ramrao Shirasao [2016
9 APL513.16.odt
All MR (Cri) 4328](supra), the Division Bench of
the Bombay High Court, Bench at Nagpur considered
the various Judgments of the Supreme Court and the
High Court and in Para 20 of the Judgment, held
thus:
"20. As has been held by Their Lordships of the
Apex Court that for permitting a trial to proceed
against the accused for the offence punishable
under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, it is
necessary for the prosecution to at least prima
facie establish that the accused had an intention
to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit
suicide. In the absence of availability of such
material, the accused cannot be compelled to face
trial for the offence punishable under Section 306
of the Indian Penal Code. As has been held by
Their Lordships of the Apex Court that abetment
involves mental process of instigating a person or
intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing
and without a positive act on the part of the
accused in aiding or instigating or abetting the
deceased to commit suicide, the said persons
cannot be compelled to face the trial. Unless there
is clear mens rea to commit an offence or active
act or direct act, which led the deceased to
commit suicide seeing no option or the act
intending to push the deceased into such a
position, the trial against the accused under
Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, in our
considered view, would be an abuse of process of
law." (emphasis supplied)
24. ......... Unless there is clear mens rea to commit
10 APL513.16.odt
an offence or active act or direct act which led the
deceased to commit suicide seeing no option or the
act intending to push the deceased into such a
position, the trial against the Applicant under Section
306 of the I.P. Code, in our considered view, would be
an abuse of process of law. (emphasis supplied)
15] Considering all these aspects, we are of the opinion that
the learned counsel for the applicants has made out a case for
exercising powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. In the result, the
criminal application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (i) and
disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE JUDGE
Diwale
