Bombay High Court
Rajkumar S/O. Gangadhar Singare ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 13 October, 2017
Bench: S.S. Shinde
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION 2980 OF 2017
Rajkumar S/o Gangadhar Shingare (Singare)
Age:53 Years, Occ.: Service
R/o Office Quarters, Panchayat Samiti
Tuljapur, Tq. Tuljapur, Dist.Osmanabad ... APPLICANT
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra,
(Copy to be served on APP
of High Court Bench at Aurangabad)
Through Bembali - P.S., Dist.Osmanabad
in Crime No.33/2017
2] Siddhanath s/o Ashok Kale
Age 28 yrs, Occu-Agril.,
R/o Ruibhar Bembali, Tq.
& Dist.Osmanabad. ..RESPONDENTS
-----
Mr.S.S.Panale, Advocate for applicant.
Mrs.P.V.Diggikar, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1.
Mr.N.K.Choudhari, Advocate for respondent No.2.
-----
CORAM : S.S.SHINDE &
MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 09/10/ 2017.
PRONOUNCED ON :13/10/2017.
JUDGMENT ( PER MANGESH S. PATIL,J.) :
1] Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
with the consent of all the parties.
2] This is an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking
quashment of the FIR in pursuance of which Crime No.33/17 has
been registered with Bembali Police Station, District Osmanabad for
the offence punishable under Section 306 r.w. Section 34 of IPC.
The respondent no.2 is the informant.
3] The deceased Ashok Kale was serving as a Junior Assistant
Clerk in the office of Panchayat Samiti, Tuljapur. Since 17/2/2017,
he had not resumed duty. In the midnight of 20/2/2017, Ashok left
home and was not traceable. Two chits were found in his pant at
home. In one of the chits, it was mentioned that Block Development
Officer was harassing him mentally and one C.L.Lokare was also
causing him harassment. In another chit, it was written that the
applicant and the Village Development Officer had caused mental
harassment and therefore, he was committing suicide. The chits
were handed over to police and everybody was in search of Ashok.
Finally on 4/3/2017 he was found dead in the field of one Ronghe
and after completing formalities, the aforementioned crime was
registered and the applicant was roped in for allegedly abetting
commission of suicide.
4] According to the learned advocate for the applicant, there is
absolutely no material except the vague so-called suicidal notes to
infer that the applicant was either intentionally aiding, instigating or
had conspired the suicide. It would be hazardous and misuse of the
process of law in allowing the Government official like the applicant
to face trial on the basis of such vague material. Learned advocate
relied upon following decisions : [1]Madan Mohan Singh V/s State of
Gujrat; 2010 AIR SCW 5101; [2] State of Kerla V/s S. Unnikrishnan;
(2015) 9 SCC 639 and [3] Dilip S/o Ramrao Shirasao and others V/s
State of Maharashtra and another; 2016 All MR (Cri) 4328.
5] The learned advocate for the respondent no.2 and the learned
APP vehemently submitted that the contents of the suicidal notes are
clinching and clearly show that the applicant had made life of
deceased Ashok miserable and subsequent event of his committing
suicide clearly shows that there was a nexus between the suicide
and the harassment. In support of their contention, they referred to
the decision in the case of State of Haryana V/s Bhajanlal; AIR 1992
S.C. 604 and submitted that the contents of the FIR at its face value
cannot be said to be falling short to constitute ingredients of the
offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. The allegations
therein cannot be said to be inherently and improbable and the case
of the applicant does not fall into any of the seven categories
mentioned therein.
6] We have carefully gone through the FIR, suicidal notes, papers
of investigation, affidavit in reply of the respondent no.2 and the
judgments cited by both the sides.
7] In order to appreciate the facts, it would be necessary to
reproduce the contents of the suicidal notes which are in vernacular
and can be roughly translated as under :
Note No.1
"I am committing suicide because of
mental harassment by B.D.O. Panchayat Samiti,
Tuljapur, Shingare Saheb, C.N.Lokare, Village
Development Officer. These two persons are
responsible for ensuing disaster on my family.
Hence I request Hon'ble Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Osmanabad to avoid such
disaster falling on the family."
Sd/- "
On the right side of above writing following has been written :
" I am committing suicide because of the
harassment meted out to me by Hon'ble B.D.O.
Awa. The Hon'ble C.E.O. should pay all his dues
to his family members without harassing them."
Note No.2
" B.D.O. Panchayat Samiti, Tuljapur has
harassed me and therefore, I am committing
suicide on 16/2/2016. C.N.Loakre has also
harassed me mentally and therefore, I am
committing suicide."
These two Notes do not bear any date, to show as to on what
date those were actually written. However in the second Note it is
mentioned that he was committing suicide today on 16/2/2016, This
clearly shows that there is has no proximity with the harassment
meted out to him and date on which he actually committed suicide in
the month of February/March, 2017.
8] Suffice for the purpose to observe that it is trite, as has been
laid down in the case of Madan Mohan Sing and Dilip Shirasao
(supra) that there has to be such proximity in the alleged act of
instigation and the actual commission of suicide and in the absence
of such proximity it cannot be said that the alleged harassment is the
cause for commission of suicide. The distinction essentially has to
be between the actual cause and the quasi-quasan. It is only such
harassment which expressly causes the person to commit suicide is
what is contemplated and required to constitute an offence of
abettment of suicide punishable under Section 306 of the IPC.
9] In the case of any employment where there is hierarchy, every
superior officer is bound to monitor working of his subordinates and it
is a part and parcel of his duties. If in discharge of such duties, the
subordinate feels that the superior was harassing him, such feeling
being harboured by a subordinate would depend upon temperament
of each person. Therefore, in the absence of specific allegation, in
the matter in hand, as to in what manner the applicant had subjected
the deceased to harassment, it would be a sheer misuse of process
of law, if the applicant is made to stand up to the trial.
10] In these circumstances, we are satisfied that applying the
principles laid down in the case of Bhajanlal (supra), even by
accepting contents of the FIR as it is, the ingredients for constituting
the offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC are not made out.
The allegations are absurd and inherently improbable. In our view,
this is a fit case to quash and set aside the FIR.
11] The Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of
prayer clauses "B" and "C".
(MANGESH S. PATIL,J.) (S.S.SHINDE,J.)
umg/
