Bombay High Court
Ramesh Digambar Ingole vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 30 September, 2021
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1985 OF 2020
Rohan Chandrasen Dongare,
Age 28 years, Occ. Service,
R/o. At post Dongarewadi Tq.
Wadwani, Dist. Beed. ... APPLICANT
(Org. accused No. 2)
VERSUS
1) The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station Pachod, Dist. Aurangabad.
2) Rahul Vitthal Aagale,
Age 18 years, Occ. Education,
R/o. Georai (Bk.) Paithan, Pachod,
Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. ... RESPONDENTS
(No. 2- Org. Complainant)
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S. G. Chapalgaonkar h/f Mr. M.R. Deshmukh.
APP for Respondent No. 1: Mr. S. J. Salgare.
Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Amit Savale (Appointed).
...
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1991 OF 2020
Ramesh Digambar Ingole,
Age 43 years, Occ. Service,
R/o. Ring Road, Ambejogai,
Tq. Ambejogai, Dist. Beed. ... APPLICANT.
(Org. accused No. 3)
VERSUS
1) The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station,Pachod, Dist.
Aurangabd.
2) Rahul Vitthal Aagale,
Age 18 years, Occ. Education,
R/o. Georai (Bk.) Paithan, Pachod,
Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. ... RESPONDENTS
(No. 2- Org. Complainant)
1/9
::: Uploaded on - 01/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 02/10/2021 06:41:43 :::
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S. G. Chapalgaonkar, h/f Mr. M.R. Deshmukh.
APP for Respondent No. 1: Mr. S. J. Salgare.
Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Amit Savale (Appointed)
CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ &
MANGESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 30.09.2021
JUDGMENT (PER : MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) :
Heard. Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the
consent of both the sides the matters are heard finally at the stage of
admission.
2. The Applicants are invoking the powers of this Court under Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( hereinafter 'Cr.P.C.') seeking
quashment of the F.I.R. dated 03.12.2019 in Crime No. I-360/2019,
registered with Police Station Pachod, District Aurangabad, for the offences
punishable under Section 306, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code, filed by the respondent No. 2.
3. Since the applicants are arraigned as co-accused seeking the same
relief, these applications are being disposed of by this common judgment.
4. The applicants are the Professor and Principal respectively of
Gurukrupa Institute of Pharmacy, Majalgaon. The deceased was a student of
that College. Because of his illness he was irregular in attending the classes.
When he tried to resume, the applicants started harassing him. Even the
Chairman of the Management indulged in harassing him mentally. Due to
which he went into depression. His parents provided him medical treatment
but he was persistently harassed, taunted and teased. He was prevented
from appearing for third semester examination. Thereafter the applicant-
Principal even demanded money from him to permit him to appear for the
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
examination. When he used to approach the applicant-Principal soliciting
signature to enable him to appear for the examination he would be directed
to meet the other applicant and in this manner he was tossed from one
applicant to the other. Even he was insulted in front of the staff members.
He was threatened that he would be failed. Even they contacted his
landlord and caused him to vacate the tenanted premises. Even his landlord
played him the recorded conversation between the applicants and the
landlord. He then tried to commit suicide by going to a place but having
seen that there was a crowd he decided to go back.
5. It is also alleged that his parents has deposited Rs. 20 Lakhs with a
Multi-State Co-Operative Bank. The Chairman of the bank and its Manager
fraudulently shown only an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- having been credited
to their account. This also mentally disturbed the deceased. When he
approached the Chairman and the Manager of the bank they threatened and
insulted him.
6. He took treatment at CIIGMA Hospital and from one Dr.
Chapalgaonkar. After getting well when he tried to resume the classes he
was not permitted. Fed up with all such persistent harassment he
committed suicide by jumping into a well in his field on 01.12.2019 leaving
behind a note-book containing description as to the nature of the
harassment meted out to him not only by the applicants but even the other
accused i.e. the Chairman of the applicants' College as well as the Bank
Manager and the Chairman of the Multi-State Co-Operative Bank. The
respondent No. 2 accordingly lodged the F.I.R. and the offence has been
registered. It is his version that the deceased had told him about the
harassment meted out to him.
7. The learned advocate Mr. Chapalgaonkar for the applicants would
submit that accepting the allegations at their face value, necessary
ingredients for constituting the offences cannot be made out. Even if it is
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
accepted that the deceased was harbouring some feeling about the
applicants having harassed him mentally, the allegations would fall short of
making out any abetment of suicide within the meaning of Section 107 of
the Indian Penal Code. If the deceased was merely called upon to be
punctual, no motive can be attributed to the applicants much less to drive
him to commit suicide. There was no instigation or intentional aid.
Therefore, there is no prima facie material to show that the applicants have
abeted the suicide.
8. Learned advocate Mr. Chapalgaonkar would then submit that there is
material on record to corroborate the stand in the F.I.R. that the deceased
was suffering from some mental illness and was taking treatment therefor.
A suicidal tendency was noted by the doctor and if that is so, there is every
room to believe that independent of the alleged harassment meted out to
him by the applicants, there could have been a distinct cause for the
deceased to commit suicide in the form of depression.
9. The learned advocate in this respect would further point out that
going by the allegations in the F.I.R., there was one more grievance being
put forth by the deceased about the two of the accused who are the
Chairman and the Manager of the Multi State Co-Operative Bank had also
played some fraud and had duped his parents. This would again constitute
an additional factor which, may be in addition to the alleged harassment
meted out by the applicants, was a causative factor. If that be so, one cannot
prima facie attribute the applicants with the allegations regarding abetment
of suicide.
10. Mr. Chapalgaonkar would further submit that a coordinate Bench of
this Court in Criminal Application No. 4298/2019 dated 20.10.2020 has
already qaushed the F.I.R. in respect of the accused No. 1, who happens to
be the President of the Society which runs the applicants' College. The
learned advocate would submit that there is no material difference in the
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
allegations being attributed against that accused and the applicants.
Therefore, even for this reason, the applicants are entitled to the same relief.
11. In support of his submissions Mr. Chapalgaonkar places reliance on
the following decisions :
(i) Madan Mohan Singh Vs. State of Gujarat, and another;
(2010) 8 Supreme Court Cases 628.
(ii) S.S. Cheena Vs. Vijaykumar Mahajan;
2010 ALL M.R. Criminal 3298 .
(iii) Dilip Ramrao Shirasao Vs. State of Maharashtra;
2016 ALL M.R. Criminal 4328.
12. The learned A.P.P. at the outset submits that already the investigation
is completed and even a charge-sheet has been filed and therefore the
prosecution deserves to be given an opportunity to substantiate its allegation
which can happen only during the trial. Therefore, the applications may be
dismissed for this sole reason.
13. The learned A.P.P. would then submit that there is a suicide note which
runs into several pages inter alia describing different incidents attributing
specific and precise role to each of the applicants. A cumulative effect of
reading all these allegations unerringly point out that the applicants did put
him to some harassment leading to mental disturbance. The fact that he
was required to take a treatment of a Psychiatric further corroborates this
inference. The inferences sought to be drawn are clearly based on the
contents of the suicide note. The deceased was put to harassment to the
extent that he could not sustain the pressure and committed suicide. He
would further point out that the suicide note also refers to an incident in the
proximate time of suicide. He would therefore submit that in view of such
peculiar state of affairs, the applicants are not entitled to derive any benefit
from the decisions cited on their behalf. The situation would be squarely
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
covered by the decision in the case of Didigam Bikshapathi and another Vs.
State of Andhra Pradesh; (2008) 2 Supreme Court Cases 403, wherein
under similar set of facts where there was suicide note clearly referring to
the acts of the accused and the roles played by them, the decision of the
High Court refusing to quash the crime was upheld.
14. The learned advocate for the respondent No. 2 submits that at this
juncture no threadbare scrutiny can be resorted to. The suicide note
indicating the nature of the harassment to which the deceased was subjected
to is prima facie sufficient to attribute the allegations of abetment and the
F.I.R. may not be quashed.
15. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the
charge-sheet as also the decisions cited at the Bar. True it is that this is not
a stage to resort to and scan through the charge-sheet to find out as to if the
material collected by the Investigating Officer would ultimately be sufficient
to convict the applicants. That is not the purport and scope of the present
enquiry.
16. However, simultaneously one needs to bear in mind that the material
needs to be scanned to ascertain if prima facie all the ingredients for
constituting the offences can be made out. There is a suicide note which
refers to and attributes some acts to each of the accused persons including
the applicants. There is a reference about how the applicants refused him
permission to resume the classes. He was teased and taunted in front of the
staff members. He was not permitted to appear for the third semester
examination and even there was a demand for money by one of the
applicants. These allegations certainly would demonstrate that prima facie
the deceased was harbouring a feeling about the harassment at the hands of
the applicants, and for that matter the other accused as well. However,
unless there is some material to demonstrate that such harassment allegedly
meted out to him was the only cause for him to commit suicide as
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
distinguished from a causa causan, we are afraid, the allegations would fall
short of making out and attributing the applicants with necessary animus
either to instigate the deceased to commit suicide or to intentionally aid him
to take that drastic step. Since the offence punishable under Section 306 of
the Indian Penal Code requires that there should be abetment, the abetment
as defined under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code needs to be borne in
mind. It involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally
aiding him to do something. Assuming for the sake of arguments that as
alleged in the suicide note the applicants had harassed the deceased, still,
the material is too short to draw any inference that they were intending to
lead him to commit suicide while subjecting him to such harassment.
17. Independently also we have perused the entire charge-sheet and
particularly the statements of the parents of the deceased, his classmates
and his landlord. The parents do not state about having any direct
knowledge about the harassment meted out to the deceased. They even do
not state about he having ever told them about it. Same is the case with his
classmates. The landlord has also denied to the allegations about applicants
having asked him to evict the deceased from the tenanted premises. If this
is the state of material collected by the Investigating Officer, we are afraid it
is too weak to make the applicants to stand up to the trial.
18. Besides, accepting the allegations in the suicide note, the alleged
harassment by the applicants was not the only factor which had caused
mental disturbance. There was one more factor. The deceased was
harbouring a feeling that his parents were duped by two of the accused
persons who are the Chairman and Manager of a Multi State Co-Operative
Bank who had allegedly even threatened him when he tried to question
them. On the basis of these allegations, even those two persons have been
arrayed as accused.
19. Interestingly, there are not even remote allegations about all the
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
accused having acted in tandem by hatching some conspiracy. In other
words, there is no nexus is even alleged between these two causative factors.
If this be so, when there were several factors, apart from the fact that the
deceased was suffering from depression and was also demonstrating suicidal
tendencies, in our considered view, the allegations do not make out
necessary ingredients for constituting the offence. There has to be some
strong material to draw an inference that the applicants had intentionally
subjected the deceased to harassment. In the absence of such material of
definite nature as distinguished from imaginary or inferential one it would
indeed be hazardous to make the applicants face the trial. The applicants
are serving in responsible posts like Principal and Professor in a professional
College and would certainly be put to disrepute if they are make to face the
trial on the basis of such scant material. This is what has been preciously
held in the case of Madan Mohan Singh (supra) and Netai Dutta Vs. State
of W.B.; (2005) 2 Supreme Court Cases 659.
20. The decision in the case of Didigam Bikshapathi (supra) can be
distinguished on facts. Referring to the suicidal note, the contents of which
cannot be found in the judgment which according to Their Lordships clearly
referred to the background in which the victim had taken the extreme step,
referring to the acts of the accused and the roles played by them, the order
of the High Court refusing to quash the crime was upheld. In the matter in
hand, as is discussed herein above, even accepting the contents of the
suicide note at its face value, prima facie the allegations do not constitute
instigation within the meaning of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. The
respondents are not entitled to derive any benefit from the decision in the
case of Didigam Bikshapathi (supra).
21. Apart from the above state of affairs, as is mentioned herein above, a
coordinate Bench of this Court has quashed the crime to the extent of one of
the accused who happens to be the President of the Society which runs the
applicants' college. Going by the allegations in the suicide note attributed to
CrAppln 1985 1991 20 J.odt
that accused and the present applicants, there is no material difference and
therefore we do not find sufficient and cogent reason to take a different
view even otherwise.
22. In the circumstances, relying upon the decision in the case of State of
Haryana and Ors V/s. Bhajan Lal and Ors.; AIR 1992 Supreme Court, 604,
the Applications deserve to be allowed and are accordingly allowed.
23. The F.I.R. dated 03.12.2019 in Crime No. I-360/2019, registered with
Police Station Pachod, District Aurangabad, for the offences punishable
under Section 306, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code
qua the applicants is quashed and set aside.
24. The Rule is made absolute.
25. Learned advocate Mr. Savale is appointed to represent the respondent
No. 2. His fees is quantified at Rs. 3000/- (Rs. Three Thousand only).
[MANGESH S. PATIL, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]
mkd
