Bombay High Court
Priyanka D/O. Premraj Mhasaye And ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., ... on 11 October, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Pushpa V. Ganediwala
1 APL314.19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APL] NO. 314 OF 2019
APPLICANTS : 1] Priyanka D/o Premraj Mhasaye,
Aged about 19 years, Occu. Education.
2] Rutika D/o Premraj Mhasaye,
Aged 16 years, Occu. Education
Since minor through her natural guardian
father Premraj S/o Kashinath Mhasaye
3] Arvind S/o Kashinath Mhasaye,
Aged 45 years, Occu. Agriculturist,
4] Rushikesh @ Akshay S/o Arvind Mhasaye,
Aged 20 years, Occu. Agriculturist,
All R/o Warkhed, Tah. Telhara, Dist. Akola.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS : 1. The State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Hiwarkhed,
Tal. Telhara, Dist. Akola.
2. Sanjay S/o Govindrao Chitode,
Aged about 50, Occu. Agriculturist,
Warkhed, Tal. Telhara, Dist. Akola.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. A. M. Tirukh, Advocate for the applicants.
Mr. S. S. Doifode, A. P. P. for the non-applicant no.1
Mr. Vipul B. Bhise, Advocate for non-applicant no.2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE and
PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ.
DATE : OCTOBER 11, 2021.
2 APL314.19.odt
ORAL JUDGMENT [Per V. M. Deshpande, J.]
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
by consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. Heard Mr. A. M. Tirukh, learned counsel for the
applicants, Mr. S. S. Doifode, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
for non-applicant no.1/State and Mr. V. B. Bhise, learned counsel for
non-applicant no.2/first informant.
3. By filing this application under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, the applicants are challenging registration of
crime vide Crime No.25/2019 against them with Police Station,
Hiwarkhed, Dist. Akola for the offence punishable under Sections
306, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on the basis
of the report lodged by non-applicant no.2. The report is dated
01.02.2019.
4. Applicant nos.1 and 2 are the real sisters, applicant no.3
is their uncle and applicant no.4 is the son of applicant no.3.
3 APL314.19.odt
5. Non-applicant no.2 complainant was having one son by
name Abhijeet. He committed suicide on 02.01.2019 by consuming
insecticide in complainant's agricultural field. The first information
report was lodged on 01.02.2019. Thus there is delay of one month
in lodging the report and precisely the first information report is
assailed by the learned counsel for the applicants on the said count
itself.
6. We are afraid that this submission of the learned counsel
for the applicant can be considered as a ground for throwing the
prosecution case in dust bin.
7. It is a trite law that it is always open for the prosecution
to explain the delay even during the course of the trial. The
explanation which is offered by the prosecution at subsequent stage
of registration of the first information report and if it is found to be
plausible one by the Court, the delay in lodgement of the first
information report can never be an impediment in proceeding further
in the prosecution case.
4 APL314.19.odt
8. Be that as it may. The point that has to be determined in
this application is as to whether there is abetment on the part of the
applicants resulting into commission of suicide by Abhijeet.
9. In the first information report, specific allegations are
made by the first informant that deceased Abhijeet was having love
affair with Rutika (applicant no.2) and on 03.01.2019 i.e. on the day
of commission of suicide when the father made search of Android
phone of the deceased, he found that there were WhatsApp chat in
between Rutika and the deceased. Also he found audio conversation
in between them. In the report, it is further stated that subsequent to
commission of suicide, Prashant Khottey, cousin of the first
informant, disclosed to him that he had a meeting with the deceased
on 31.12.2018 and that time he found that Abhijeet was reeling
under mental stress and upon enquiry he diverged to him that Rutika
was pressurizing him that he should marry with her, which was not
possible for him because of his unemployment at the relevant time.
It is also alleged in the report that applicant nos.3 and 4 had
extended threat that if Abhijeet will not marry with Rutika, he will
have to face the consequences. With these assertions and allegations,
the first information report was lodged.
5 APL314.19.odt
10. This Court issued notices to the respondents on
22.03.2019 and while issuing notices it was observed that though the
Investigating Officer may continue with the investigation, he shall
not file the charge-sheet without leave of the Court.
11. The respondent/State as well as respondent no.2 have
filed their respective replies. Along with the reply filed on behalf of
the State, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has placed on
record statement of the first informant recorded under Section 161 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, dated 04.02.2019 by the
Investigating Officer during the course of the investigation. Perusal
of the said statement would show that the first informant has turned
around insofar as love affair of his deceased son with Rutika in his
statement dated 04.02.2019. He states that his deceased son was
having love with applicant no.1 Priyanka, real sister of applicant
no.2.
12. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has
made available to us the investigation papers. He invited our
attention to the statements of three witnesses, namely Amol Katkar,
6 APL314.19.odt
Prashant Khotte and Manikrao Wankhede. All these statements were
recorded on the very same day on 04.02.2019 i.e. after recording
161 statement of the complainant. Though, in the first information
report there is a reference of Prashant Khotte, Amol Katkar also
claims that on 31.12.2018 he met with Abhijeet and states alike of
Prashant. Manikrao's statement shows that he had meeting with
Abhijeet on 02.01.2019 and that time he found that the deceases was
under mental tension because of his love with Priyanka and her
insistence for marriage.
13. Chapter V of the Indian Penal Code deals with abetment.
Section 107 reads as under :-
107. Abetment of a thing.--A person abets the doing of a
thing, who--
First -- Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly - Engages with one or more other person or
persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act
or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that
conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
Thirdly - Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission,
the doing of that thing.
14. By catena of authoritative pronouncements by the
Hon'ble Apex Court as well as numerous decisions of this Court,
abetment involves mental process instigating a person for doing
7 APL314.19.odt
something. In one of the recent decisions in Ude Singh and
others .vs. State of Haryana, reported in (2019) 17 SCC 301, the
Hon'ble Apex Court has ruled as under :-
"16.1 For the purpose of finding out if a person
has abetted commission of suicide by another, the
consideration would be if the accused is guilty of
the act of instigation of the act of suicide. As
explained and reiterated by this Court in the
decisions above-referred, instigation means to
goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to
do an act. If the persons who committed suicide
had been hypersensitive and the action of accused
is otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a
similarly circumstanced person to commit suicide,
it may not be safe to hold the accused guilty of
abetment of suicide. But, on the other hand, if the
accused by his acts and by his continuous course of
conduct creates a situation which leads the
deceased perceiving no other option except to
commit suicide, the case may fall within the four-
corners of Section 306 IPC. If the accused plays an
active role in tarnishing the self-esteem and self-
respect of the victim, which eventually draws the
victim to commit suicide, the accused may be held
guilty of abetment of suicide. The question of mens
rea on the part of the accused in such cases would
be examined with reference to the actual acts and
deeds of the accused and if the acts and deeds are
only of such nature where the accused intended
nothing more than harassment or snap show of
anger, a particular case may fall short of the offence
of abetment of suicide. However, if the accused
8 APL314.19.odt
kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by
words or deeds until the deceased reacted or was
provoked, a particular case may be that of
abetment of suicide. Such being the matter of
delicate analysis of human behaviour, each case is
required to be examined on its own facts, while
taking note of all the surrounding factors having
bearing on the actions and psyche of the accused
and the deceased."
15. The first informant is changing his stand in respect of
love affair of his son. Firstly he asserts that his son was in love with
Rutika and then he changed his version and states that his son was
having love with Priyanka. The allegation made against applicant
nos.3 and 4 are most general and vague in nature. Further, assuming
that either Rutika or Priyanka was in love relation with Abhijeet that
by itself cannot be a ground to state that they have abeted the
deceased that he should commit suicide. Even from the first
information report, it reveals that the first informant found
WhatsApp chat in between Rutika and the deceased. In our view,
even that will not be helpful for the prosecution inasmuch as the girl
who is in love affair with a person insisting that person/boy that he
should culminate their love relation into marriage, in our view,
cannot be the abetment.
9 APL314.19.odt
16. On examination of the material as placed before us by
the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, we are of the view that the
applicants cannot be blamed for the suicide committed by the victim.
Resultantly, we pass the following order :
ORDER
1. Criminal Application (APL) No. 314 of 2019 stands
allowed.
2. First Information Report dated 01.02.2019 vide Crime
No.25/2019, registered with Police Station, Hiwarkhked,
Dist. Akola for the offence punishable under Sections
306, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code
against applicant nos.1 to 4 stands quashed and set
aside.
3. Rule is made absolute. The application is disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE
Diwale
