Shital Chandrakant Trivedi And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 12176 Bom

  Judgment                             1                               apl504.21.odt


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                    NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.


               CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 504/2021


 1]       Shital Chandrakant Trivedi,
          Aged about 39 years, Occ. Agriculturist
          R/o. Radhakrushna Nagari, Lohara,
          Yavatmal, Tq. & Dist. Yavatmal

 2]       Rajendra Manoharprasad Trivedi,
          Aged about 57 years, Occ. Agriculturist
          R/o. Shivaji Nagar, Arni Road, Yavatmal
          Tq. & Dist. Yavatmal
                                                         .... APPLICANT(S)

                                // VERSUS //

 1]       State of Maharashtra,
          Through Station House Officer,
          Awadhutwadi Police Station,
          Yavatmal, Tq. & Dist. Yavatmal

 2]       Smt. Jyoti Vilas Trivedi,
          Aged about 50 years, Occ. Housewife,
          R/o. Shivaji Nagar, Arni Road, Yavatmal
          Tq. & Dist. Yavatmal
                                               .... NON-APPLICANT(S)

  *******************************************************************
              Shri V.D. Darne, Advocate for the applicant(s)
             Shri T.A. Mirza, APP for the non-applicant/State
         Shri M.K. Kulkarni, Advocate for the non-applicant no. 2
  *******************************************************************

                    CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

AUGUST 31, 2021

ANSARI

Judgment 2 apl504.21.odt

JUDGMENT : (PER:- AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)

1] Heard.

 2]               RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.



 3]               By this application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, the applicants are challenging registration of F.I.R.

No. 357/2021 registered with the non-applicant no. 1 - Police Station

for the offences punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of

the Indian Penal Code.

4] The first information report came to be registered against the

applicants with the accusations that the applicant no. 2 was residing in

the house in relation to which there was dispute between the applicant

no. 2 and deceased Sagar. There was civil suit as regards possession of the

said house. It is alleged that the applicant no. 2 was constantly torturing

and harassing deceased Sagar. It is alleged that the applicant no. 2

demanded an amount of Rs. 50 lakh from deceased Sagar to vacate the

said house and plot. It is alleged that deceased Sagar was fed up with the

harassment caused by the applicant no. 2. It is also alleged that the

ANSARI

Judgment 3 apl504.21.odt

applicant no. 1 was harassing deceased Sagar on the ground of payment

of commission of business of brokership between the deceased and

applicant no. 2. The applicants have therefore challenged registration of

the first information report by way of filing the present application.

5] This Court on 04/05/2021 issued notices to the non-

applicants and granted interim relief directing that charge-sheet shall not

be filed against the applicants in the matter without seeking leave of this

Court. The non-applicant no. 1, in pursuance of the notice issued by this

Court, has filed reply dated 11/05/2021 stating that the material on

record discloses prima-facie involvement of the applicants in the crime

alleged against them. The non-applicant no. 2 has also filed reply stating

that the applicants had made the life of deceased Sagar miserable and

there was no other alternative for him but to commit suicide and it is the

applicants who are responsible for the suicide of deceased Sagar.

6] Taking into consideration the allegations in the first

information report and the material produced by the applicants along

with the replies filed by the non-applicants, we are of the considered

opinion that there is no material against the applicants which show that

the applicants have either instigated or intentionally aided the deceased

ANSARI

Judgment 4 apl504.21.odt

Sagar to commit suicide. There is no active act or direct act committed by

the applicants which led deceased Sagar to commit suicide. Neither there

is any allegation in the first information report nor the material produced

by the non-applicant no. 1 shows that the applicants intentionally

pushed deceased Sagar into such position that he committed suicide.

7] A useful reference can be made to the decision of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar vs. State of

Chhattisgarh reported in 2001 (9) SCC 618. The Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the context of ingredients of offence punishable under Section

306 of the Indian Penal Code has laid down as under :-

"20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence.

Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending

ANSARI

Judgment 5 apl504.21.odt

the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.

21. In State of W. B. v. Orilal Jaiswal, this Court has cautioned that the Court should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial for the purpose of finding whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life by committing suicide. If it transpires to the Court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and differences in domestic life quite common to the society to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord and differences were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the Court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty."

8] The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan

Singh vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2010) 8 SCC 628 has quashed the

first information report even though there was name of the accused in

the suicide note. In the facts of the present case, there is no allegation

which constitute any offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 of

the Indian Penal Code. On overall perusal of the first information report

and the material placed before us, prima-facie, we are satisfied that

ANSARI

Judgment 6 apl504.21.odt

continuance of the present proceedings against the applicants would

amount to abuse of process of the Court.

9] Hence, the following order:-

F.I.R. No. 357/2021 registered with the non-applicant no. 1

- Police Station against the applicants for the offences

punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending

application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

                   (JUDGE)                                 (JUDGE)




 ANSARI