Smt. Naina W/O Satish Komreliwar vs State Of Mah, Thr Secretary Home ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2089 Bom

                                                                                                                          908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt
                                                                                      (1)

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                                       CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.370/2019

                           Smt Nayna w/o Satish Komreliwar
                           Age 32 Yrs., Occ.: Household,
                           R/o Allapalli, Tah. Aheri,
                           Distt. Gadchiroli.                                                                        ..... PETITIONER


                                                                        // VERSUS //
             1)            State of Maharashtra,
                           Through Secretary,
                           Home Department,
                           Mantralaya, Mumbai.

             2)            Superintendent of Police,
                           Gadchiroli, Distt. Gadchiroli

             3)            Dy. Director, Land Record,
                           Old Secretariat Building,
                           Civil Line, Nagpur.

             4)            District Superintendent
                           of Land Record,
                           Gadchiroli, Distt. Gadchiroli.

             5)            Dy. Superintendent of Land Record,
                           Dhanora, Distt. - Gadchiroli.

             6)            Officer on Duty Police Station,
                           Dhanora, Distt. Gadchiroli.                                                        .... RESPONDENTS


             ----- ---------- ------------------------------------------------------------
                           Shri C. N. Funde, Advocate for petitioner
                           Shri S. M. Ghodeswawr, Addl.P.P. for the respondents.
             - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -




::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2021                                                                  ::: Downloaded on - 25/08/2021 21:29:14 :::
                                                                          908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt
                                                   (2)

                                     CORAM :       SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
                                                   AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

                                     DATED     :    02/02/2021


             ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER:- SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)



             1]                Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.


             2]                Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel

             appearing for the parties.


             3]                By this petition, the petitioner, widow of deceased

Satish Komreliwar has sought writ of mandamus directing

respondent nos.1 and 2, the Home Secretary, Mumbai and

Superintendent of Police, Gadchiroli to re-investigate the

incident of suicide committed by deceased Satish in the office of

respondent no.5, the Deputy Superintendent Land Record,

Dhanora, district Gadchiroli with a further direction for

registering an offence punishable under Section 307 of the

Indian Penal Code against those whose names are mentioned in

the suicide note left by deceased Satish.

4] The facts of the case briefly stated are as under:

(i) Deceased Satish Komreliwar was posted to the office

of Deputy Superintendent, Land Record, Dhanora as Surveyor

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

and was working under the control and supervision of the

Deputy Superintendent Land Record at the relevant time.

Deceased Satish had some behavioural issues as could be seen

from the facts brought on record by respondent no.6, the

Investigating Officer, in the reply filed by him. Deceased Satish

appeared to be not obedient and not following the office

decorum. He was given to habit of remaining absent

unauthorizedly for longer durations. On 25.02.2011, he was

directed to attend one training programme at Aurangabad and

was also relived from the Dhanora office on the same day. But,

instead of joining the training programme, deceased Satish went

elsewhere with the result that he was seen as avoiding training

programme and also keeping himself away from attending his

office at Dhanora. At that time he remained absent from office

for a considerable period of time. He ultimately reported to

office on 17.08.2011 with an intention to join his duty. But,

since he had remained unauthorizedly absent for a period which

was more than six months, he was called upon to present

himself before the Medical Board of Government College and

Hospital at Nagpur and obtain a fitness certificate from the

Medical Board. Deceased Satish did not like it and therefore, he

did not comply with the order. Sometime thereafter, on

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

20.09.2011, deceased Satish came to office under the influence

of liquor and at that time he was carrying in his hand a sharp

weapon. Deceased Satish brandished the weapon and issued

threat to the employee present at the office. Deceased Satish

then went to Deputy Superintendent Land Record and hurling

abuses at him, ransacked the office articles like fan, table and

chairs and also broke the window panes of the office.

Ultimately, he was charge-sheeted for his such indisciplined

behaviour under Rule 3(1)(2)(3) and Rule 28(A)(B)(C)(D)(E)

of the Maharashtra Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1979.

Offences punishable under Sections 427, 494 and 506 of the

Indian Penal Code vide Crime No.3006 of 2011, were also

registered against him at Police Station, Dhanora. The

departmental inquiry that was initiated against him was

completed in accordance with the procedure and punishment of

compulsory retirement from service was awarded to him. As a

result, he was compulsory retired with effect from 07.01.2014.

(ii) As deceased Satish was compulsorily retired, he

was not deprived of his pensionery benefits, which were payable

to him in accordance with rules. In fact, they were directed to

be paid to him in accordance with rules.

(iii) After such compulsory retirement of deceased

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

Satish, it appears that he was not in a proper frame of mind and

his distressed condition appeared to be there till the fateful day

when his dead body was found to be in a hanging condition in

the morning of 20.01.2014, at about 9.30 a.m., at the office of

the Deputy Superintendent, Land Record, Dhanora.

Immediately thereafter, a report was made at Police Station,

Dhanora and on its basis, an AD inquiry bearing No.2 of 2014

was registered at the police station under Section 174 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure. Statements of various witnesses

were recorded in this inquiry and those witnesses included

widow of the deceased who is the present petitioner.

(iv) A copy of the statement of the petitioner recorded

in this AD inquiry is available on record. The statement has

been recorded on 27.01.2014. In this statement, petitioner

expressed no suspicion against anybody. In fact, petitioner

categorically stated that she was unable to assign any reason for

such untimely death of deceased Satish. There were also some

suicide notes found during the course of the AD inquiry and

from those notes, it was noticed that it was a case of suicide and

that deceased Satish had put the entire blame for his

committing suicide on Bhagwan Sitaram Bhoye, the then

Deputy Superintendent Land Record, Dhanora, though the

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

suicide note gave no details of alleged harassment, such as

dates, place, nature and so on. Copies of the suicide notes are

available on record and they are at page nos.55, 56 and 57. In

the 3rd suicide note, however, names of few more persons are

taken, but no blame has been placed on them. It is only stated

that those named persons be not allowed to touch his dead

body. About the other two suicide notes, we may reiterate that

except for saying that Shri Bhoye was responsible nothing more

was written. So, the suicide notes by themselves were not

sufficient to reach to the conclusion that commission of suicide

was, prima-facie, a case of abetment of suicide. To worsen the

problem, there were no witnesses either including the petitioner

who would furnish any details about the kind of harassment

that was being allegedly given to deceased Satish by Shri Bhoye.

The postmortem report also did not give any clue about the

nature of death of Satish except for the one relating to suicidal

nature of his death.

(v) This was thus a case of no incriminating material

having been found against anybody during the course of AD

inquiry. It was, therefore, concluded that death of Satish was on

account of suicide committed by him and thus the AD inquiry

was finally closed on 25th February, 2019.

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

5] It was after such closure of the AD inquiry that the

petitioner now has approached this Court seeking a direction for

reinvestigation of the incident of commission of suicide by her

husband.

6] According to the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the husband of the petitioner was subjected to a lot of torture

and mental harassment in his office and that was at the hands

of his superior officer, one Shri Bhoye, the then Deputy

Superintendent Land Record, Dhanora. Such contention of the

petitioner, as rightly submitted by learned Addl. P. P., flies

directly in the face of what she has stated before police when

her statement was recorded on 27.01.2014 during the course of

AD inquiry. At that point of time, the petitioner did not blame

the conduct and behaviour of Shri Bhoye as something behind

commission of suicide by her husband. Then, it is an admitted

fact that way back in June 2013 or to be precise on 07.06.2013,

Shri Bhoye was transferred to Nashik and thereafter whatever

happened was only because of the own conduct, rather

misconduct of petitioner's deceased husband himself. If Shri

Bhoye, was transferred to Nashik from Dhanora about seven

months before the suicide, it is certain that for about seven

months prior to date of incident, there was no question of so

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

called harassment whatsoever at the hands of Shri Bhoye. In

this back-ground that we have to consider the sequence of

events discussed earlier. They disclose serious misconduct of

deceased Satish and repeatedly and which resulted into his

receiving punishment in a disciplinary action and it was in the

nature of compulsory retirement. All these facts and

circumstances together would show that the contention that

there was great harassment being meted out to deceased Satish

in his office and in particularly at the hands of Shi Bhoye, is

baseless, to say the least.

7] It is also not the case of the petitioner that AD

inquiry that was conducted after the death of Satish from

January 2014 till 25.02.2019 was done in an improper manner

and that many of the material circumstances were ignored.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has not pointed out to us as

to which circumstances and statements of which of the

witnesses could have been material in this inquiry. On going

through the reply filed on behalf of respondent no.6, we find

that this inquiry was conducted in a satisfactory manner and as

of now there is nothing available on record for us to express any

doubt about the fairness and efficacy of the inquiry so

conducted and the conclusion reached at the end of the inquiry.

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

About the suicide notes, we have already pointed out as to how

they do not by themselves constitute any basis for registration of

any offence.

8] There are a few more relevant circumstances which

would, in our opinion, show the hollowness of the claim of the

petitioner. As we have stated earlier, dead body of Satish was

found from his office in the morning of 20.01.2014. Almost

about three months thereafter, i.e. on 09.04.2014, this

petitioner made an application to the then Deputy Director Land

Record, Dhanora for appointing her in place of her husband on

compassionate ground. At that time, Shri Bhoye had already

been transferred to Nashik and some other officer was

officiating in his place. This application filed by the petitioner

came to be rejected on 10.07.2014 on the ground that as her

husband had already been compulsorily retired and thus had

not been in service, her application seeking compassionate

appointment could not be granted. Later on, the petitioner filed

another representation with the Higher Authority, one

Jamabandi Commissioner/Director, Land Record, Pune

28.04.2017 making a request for cancelling the punishment of

compulsory retirement given to her husband. Then, she also

made another application seeking her appointment on

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

compassionate ground, which was rejected once again on

05.06.2017. Thereafter, petitioner filed original application

before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench

at Nagpur vide OA Stamp No.36 of 2020 seeking two reliefs

regarding quashing of the order of compulsory retirement of her

husband and granting the petitioner compassionate

appointment. The prayers made in this application read as

follows:

"i) To quash and set aside the order dated 07/01/2014 - Annex Q issued by Dy. Director Land Record division Nagpur respondent No.2 & order dt.5/6/2017 issued by Jamabandi Commissioner, Pune Annex.Y thereby retired the husband of applicant deceased Satish Komreliwar compalsary from his service and directed to the respondent to appoint the applicant in place of her deceased husband as per her qualification on compensatory ground.

ii) To direct the respondents to appoint the applicant on compensatory ground in place of her husband Satish Komreliwar pending decision of the application by way of interim relief."

9] In this application filed before MAT, Nagpur, it is

interesting to note, the petitioner made an allegation that she

was told by her deceased husband that because of harassment

given to him by Shri Bhoye he would finish his life. In this

application no date or any period of time when such disclosure

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

was made to her by deceased Satish has been stated. This

allegation runs contrary to the statement made during the

course of AD inquiry by the petitioner to the effect that at that

point of time she could not state any reason for commission of

suicide by her deceased husband. It is not known as to whether

or not petitioner mentioned the said fact of harassment of her

husband at the hands of Shri Bhoye when she made an

application on 09.04.2014 seeking appointment on

compassionate ground. It is also not known as to whether or

not this allegation was levelled by her in her application dated

28.04.2017 made to Jamabandi Commissioner/Director Land

Record, Pune requesting him to quash and set aside the order of

compulsory retirement and also in another application dated

05.06.2017 seeking her appointment on compassionate ground.

Another interesting fact is that after her statement dated

27.01.2014 wherein the petitioner expressed no suspicion over

anybody regarding abetment of commission suicide by her

husband, the petitioner did not file any complaint with any of

the Higher Authorities of the deceased husband and also Police

Station, Dhanora making allegations against Shri Bhoye or any

other officer or employee working at the office of Deputy

Superintendent, Land Record, Dhanora.

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

10] These background facts and the silence of the

petitioner would together show that the demand for

re-investigation of the incident of commission of suicide by the

deceased Satish has been made by the petitioner possibly for the

reason that now the petitioner has been annoyed at rejection of

her two applications for her being appointed on compassionate

ground and also the rejection of her application for

recalling/quashing of the order of compulsory retirement by the

Higher Authority. If this were not so, and if the case of the

petitioner were to be genuine, the petitioner would not have

waited for such a long period of time in approaching this Court

or for that matter any other Authority having power to make

investigation or re-investigation into the incident. Interestingly,

till this date, the petitioner has not filed any complaint with

Police Station, Dhanora giving all the details about the

harassment allegedly given to her husband by Shri Bhoye or any

other officer or employee then working at Dhanora Land Record

office.

11] Then, if the allegations of alleged harassment given

by Shri Bhoye to deceased Satish were to be considered in any

way, still, in our opinion, these allegations by themselves would

not constitute any instigation as contemplated under Section

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

107 of the Indian Penal Code, so necessary for registration of an

offence of abetment of suicide punishable under Section 306 of

the Indian Penal Code. The reason being that Shri Bhoye was

admittedly transferred from Dhanora to Nashik on 07.06.2013

and the suicide was committed between 18.01.2014 and

20.01.2014. This gap of about seven months between June

2013 and January 2014 finally snapped the live link between

the alleged acts of harassment if any and commission of suicide.

12] There is one more perspective from which the

whole incident is required to be examined. Ultimately, Shri

Bhoye was only performing his supervisory duty and if he had

requested deceased Satish to appear before Medical Board or

bring medical certificate or had issued show cause notices to

him, the supervisory officer cannot be blamed for it as whatever

he had done or would have done, was or would be within his

ostensible authority to exercise control and superintendence

over his sub-ordinate staff. Such authority of a superior officer

must not be questioned. But, in this case, we feel an attempt

has been made to cast a cloud over such authority of the officer

by levelling a serious allegation of abetment of commission of

suicide by Satish. If the action of such superior officer are

considered to be illegal bordering on harassment by any

908Cri.WP.370.2019.odt

employee, suitable remedial measures are always available

within the administrative set up and if such employee, instead

of resorting to an in house procedure for redressal of his

grievance commits suicide, such employee would only be

responsible for it, and no one else. It is for this reason that we

are of the view that the facts of this case are squarely covered by

the view taken by Co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in

the case of Dilip Ramrao Shriasrao and Ors. Vs. State of

Maharashtra, reported in 2016 ALL MR (Cri) 4328.

13] In the result, we find that there is no merit in this

petition. We further find that the conclusion drawn in the AD

inquiry bearing No.2 of 2014 regarding suicidal death of

deceased Satish cannot be doubted.

             14]               The Writ Petition stands dismissed.


                               Rule is discharged.




                               JUDGE                                    JUDGE

             sarkate