Bombay High Court
Pratik S/O Narhari Mate vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Armori ... on 22 January, 2024
Author: Vinay Joshi
Bench: Vinay Joshi
2024:BHC-NAG:1116-DB
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1072/2023
Pratik s/o Narhari Mate,
Aged about 22 yrs.,
Occ. Police Constable,
R/o. Gandhi Ward, Desaiganj,
Tah. Desaiganj, Dist. Gadchiroli.
... APPLICANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Police Station Armori,
Dist. Gadchiroli.
2. Purnima Namdeo Khobragade,
Aged 35 yrs., Occ. Constable,
R/o. Shivani, Sindewahi,
Tah. Armori, Dist. Gadchiroli.
... NON-APPLICANTS
---------------------------------
Mr. Madhur Deo, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. M.J.Khan, Addl. Public Prosecutor ('APP') for non-applicant
No.1.
Mr. A.N. Darunde, Advocate h/f Ms. Mohini Sarma, Advocate
(appointed) for non-applicant No.2.
----------------------------------
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND
MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 22.01.2024.
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
2
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER VINAY JOSHI, J.) :
Heard.
2. Admit.
3. By this application, the applicant is seeking to quash Final
Report filed under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
('Code') for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian
Penal Code arising out of First Information Report ('FIR') Crime No.
215/2023 registered with Police Station Armori, Dist. Gadchiroli
which is numbered as Sessions Case No.3/2024.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the applicant
submitted that even if the First Information Report ('FIR'), charge-
sheet and the material available on record are taken into
consideration, the ingredients to constitute an offence punishable
under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out,
therefore, the FIR and the charge-sheet are liable to be quashed. The
learned Counsel for the applicant relied on various decisions of the
Supreme Court to contend that, if collected material falls short to
make out prima facie case to constitute an offence charged, the
prosecution is required to be quashed. It is submitted that the
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
essential aspect of abetment as defined under Section 107 of the
Indian Penal Code was totally absent. The material fell short to
make out that the applicant has instigated the deceased to commit
suicide.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant
No.2/informant and the learned APP for State took us through
certain statements of witnesses and stated that the act of the
applicant was of such a nature that he has instigated deceased to
commit suicide. It is argued that there is clear material to indicate
that the applicant gave constant threats to the deceased to make viral
photographs which caused deceased to take such extreme step. It is
submitted that the material collected by the prosecution is sufficient
to make out prima facie case.
6. With the assistance of both sides, we have examined the
entire material. Deceased Sharda was serving in the Police
Department as well applicant/accused too. Sharda committed
suicide by drowning on 30.06.2023 at about 04.00 p.m. by jumping
into the river. On the following day in the evening, elder brother of
Sharda has lodged report which caused Police to register an offence
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
and investigate the matter.
7. It is informant's case that on 20.06.2023, she noticed that
deceased Sharda was remaining in disturbed condition. The
informant inquired, on which deceased disclosed that while she was
serving at Laheri, she met accused, love relationship was developed
between them from four to five months. The accused assured her for
marriage, however latter on refused to marry. Deceased disclosed
that since the accused refused for marriage, she has been defamed at
her service place and therefore, she does not find interest in living.
The informant and her brother tried to convince that it is a routine
affair, and she shall not live under tension.
8. The informant stated that on 30.06.2023 around 02.00
p.m. deceased left the house by her two wheeler (scooty) without
informing anybody. The informant telephonically tried to contact
her, on which deceased stated that she is at Armori - Bramhapur
road. Informant and her brother rushed to said place, however found
two wheeler and slippers in abandoned condition on the river bridge.
After search, they found that she was lying dead in the river water.
The informant stated that since the applicant has denied for
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
marriage, the deceased committed suicide under frustration.
9. The learned counsel appearing for applicant would submit
that the contents of FIR nowhere discloses that the applicant has
either instigated or abetted the deceased in the act of committing
suicide. The contents of FIR only discloses that though the applicant
was having love relation with deceased, however he has merely
denied for the marriage. We have gone through the supplementary
statement of informant, wherein she added that the applicant took
some photographs of deceased and had threatened her to make viral
the photographs. The entire thrust of the prosecution is on the
alleged threats given by the applicant. In this regard, the learned
APP took us through the statements of informant's another sister
Shama, and one Gangadhar who stated about alleged threats. We
have also been taken through the statement of the applicant's
brother. The learned defence counsel pointed that though Shama
has made reference about alleged threat, however there are no
particulars about the threat. Moreover, our attention has been
invited to the statement of Shama recorded under Section 164 of the
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
Code which is totally silent about alleged threats. It appears that
witness Pankaj Wanjari has expressed fear that the applicant may
viral the photographs. It reveals that it was the perception of
Wanjari, however he never stated that actual threats were given.
10. The learned counsel appearing for applicant would submit
that the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 of the
Indian Penal Code are totally missing. The prosecution case does not
make out the intention of the accused to abet or instigate deceased to
commit suicide. The evidence is not capable of suggesting that the
accused intended by such act to instigate deceased. It is pointed out
that no such photographs or video clips have been seized during
investigation. There appears to be totally vague reference to that
effect.
11. The learned counsel appearing for applicant would submit
that even if the prosecution case is accepted, that the applicant has
threatened deceased to make viral photographs, however neither
there are particulars nor does isolate act amounts to intentional
instigation. It is submitted that the presence of mens rea is necessary
which is totally missing. The allegation of either direct or indirect act
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
of incitement cannot be made out. Particularly it is argued that
because of only the applicant refused for marriage, the lady took
extreme step. In order to substantiate said contention, the learned
counsel for applicant relied on the following decisions:-
(I) Arnab Manoranjan Goswami Vs. State of
Maharashtra & ors., (2021) 2 SCC 427.
(II) Geo Varghese Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2021 SCC
Online SC 873.
(III) Gurcharan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2020) 10
SCC 200,
(IV) S.S. Chheena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan &
another, (2010) 12 SCC 190.
(V) Vaijnath Kondiba Khandke Vs. State of
Maharashtra & anr. (2018) 7 SCC 781.
(VI) Lata Vs. State of Maharashtra, through Police
Station Officer Parva and anr., 2022 SCC OnLine Bom
2840.
(VII) Bhartendra s/o Dhanraj Bhoyar Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & anr. (Criminal Writ Petition
No.519/2014, decided on 13.04.2023).
(VIII) Akash Dashrath Khanzode Vs. The State of
Maharashtra & anr. (Criminal Application [APL] No.
1076/2022 decided on 22.12.2022).
(IX) State of Kerala & ors. Vs. S. Unnikrishnan Nair &
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
ors., (2015) 9 SCC 639.
(X) Salib alias Shalu alias Salim Vs. State of U.P. &
ors. 2023 SCC OnLine SC 947.
(XI) State of Karnataka Vs. Muniswamy & ors., (1977)
2 SCC 699.
(XII) Dipakbhai Jagdishchandra Patel Vs. State of
Gujarat & anr, (2019) 16 SCC 547.
12. In order to impress that the cause for suicide was not the
threats, but refusal of marriage, the applicant took us through the
statement of witness Chandramani. He has stated that soon before
the suicidal death, he had telephonic talk with the deceased. He
stated that on the day of occurrence, around 02.30 p.m., he had talk
with deceased on telephone. Deceased inquired with him about
whereabouts of the applicant. Again, within fiew minutes,
Chandramani had conversation with deceased on which she stated
that I cannot go to the house of the applicant as they would not
accept. The said conversation soon before death assumes
significance. Deceased did not disclose that since she was under
persistent threat, she took such extreme step rather it is evident that
since the applicant denied for marriage, she has committed suicide
under frustration.
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
13. In the case of Sanju Alias Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State
of M.P., - (2002) 5 SCC 371, the Supreme Court was considering a
situation where the deceased had left behind a suicide note, wherein
it was specifically stated that the accused was responsible for his
death. In the said case, the Supreme Court considered the liability of
the accused to face investigation and prosecution under Section 306
of the Indian Penal Code, in the context of Section 107 thereof and
it was held that the word "instigate" denotes incitement or urging to
do some drastic or inadvisable action or to stimulate or incite, further
holding that presence of mens rea, therefore, was a necessary
concomitant of instigation. It was found that in the said case the
alleged abusive words were used by the accused against the
deceased, two days prior to the date when the deceased was found
hanging. In these circumstances, the Supreme Court found it fit to
quash the criminal proceedings.
14. In the case of Madan Mohan Singh Vs. State of Gujarat
and another - (2010) 8 SCC 628, the accused was alleged to have
instigated his driver to commit suicide. There was a detailed suicidal
note left behind by the deceased and the accused had approached
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
the High Court for quashing of the FIR and the criminal proceedings,
but his prayer was rejected, as consequence of which, the accused
was before the Supreme Court seeking relief. The Supreme Court
analyzed Section 306 read with 107 of the Indian Penal Code and
found that there has to be proximity between the alleged acts of the
accused and the extreme step taken by the deceased of committing
suicide. It was held that the allegations made and the material ought
to be of a definite nature and not imaginary or inferential. The
Supreme Court went into the suicidal note of about 15 pages and
found that the contents thereof expressed the anguish of the
deceased, who felt that his boss (the accused) had wronged him, but
it was noted that the contents fell short of depicting an intentional
act on the part of the accused for driving the deceased to commit
suicide. On this basis, the judgment of the High Court was set aside
and the FIR and criminal proceedings were quashed.
15. Observations made by the Supreme Court in paragraph
No.25 of the decision in case of S.S. Chheena Vs. Vijay Kumar
Mahajan and another - (2010) 12 SCC 190, are relevant, which reads
as under :
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
"25. Abetment involves a mental process of
instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person
in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the
part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing
suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The
intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases
decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict
a person under Section 306 IPC there has to be a
clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also
requires an active act or direct act which led the
deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and
that act must have been intended to push the
deceased into such a position that he committed
suicide."
16. Similarly, in the case of M.Mohan Vs. State Represented
by the Deputy Superintendent of Police - (2011) 3 SCC 626, the
Supreme Court held in the context of abetment as follows: -
"44. Abetment involves a mental process of
instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person
in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the
part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing
suicide, conviction cannot be sustained.
45. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of
the cases decided by this court are clear that in order
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
to convict a person under section 306 IPC there has
to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also
requires an active act or direct act which led the
deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and this
act must have been intended to push the deceased
into such a position that he/she committed suicide."
17. In the case of Geo Varghese Vs. State of Rajasthan and
another, 2021 SCC Online SC 873, the Supreme Court held as
follows : -
"23. What is required to constitute an alleged
abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC is
there must be an allegation of either direct or
indirect act of incitement to the commission of
offence of suicide and mere allegations of
harassment of the deceased by another person
would not be sufficient in itself, unless, there are
allegations of such actions on the part of the
accused which compelled the commission of
suicide. Further, if the person committing suicide
is hypersensitive and the allegations attributed to
the accused is otherwise not ordinarily expected
to induce a similarly situated person to take the
extreme step of committing suicide, it would be
unsafe to hold the accused guilty of abetment of
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
suicide. Thus, what is required is an examination
of every case on its own facts and circumstances
and keeping in consideration the surrounding
circumstances as well, which may have bearing
on the alleged action of the accused and the
psyche of the deceased."
18. In order to consider whether section 306 would apply to
the facts in case, one would have to consider whether the essential
ingredients of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code are disclosed.
Hence, it would be apposite to reproduce Sections 306 and 107 of
the Indian Penal Code. The same read as under;
"306. Abetment of suicide - If any person commits
suicide, whoever abets the commission of such
suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to ten
years, and shall also be liable to fine.
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
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that
thing."
19. In the case of Ramesh Kumar V/s. State of Chhattisgarh -
[2001] 9 SCC 618, the Apex Court has observed in para as under;
"20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward,
provoke, incite or or encourage to do "an act". To
satisfy the requirement of instigation through 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 the
consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be
instigation."
20. Recently the Supreme Court in case of Ude Singh and
others .vrs. State of Haryana - 2019 SCC Online SC 924, extensively
surveyed the law in the field and summarized the principles in cases
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
of alleged abetment of suicide. The relevant observations contained
in paragraph nos. 16.1 and 16.2 reads as below :
"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
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
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 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.
16.2. We may also observe that human mind
could be affected and could react in myriad ways;
and impact of one's action on the mind of another
carries several imponderables. Similar actions are
dealt with differently by different persons; and so
far a particular person's reaction to any other
human's action is concerned, there is no specific
theorem or yardstick to estimate or assess the
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
same. Even in regard to the factors related with
the question of harassment of a girl, many factors
are to be considered like age, personality,
upbringing, rural or urban set ups, education etc.
Even the response to the ill-action of eve-teasing
and its impact on a young girl could also vary for
a variety of factors, including those of
background, selfconfidence and upbringing.
Hence, each case is required to be dealt with on
its own facts and circumstances."
21. The term "'Abetment' involves mental process of
instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a
thing. Without positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or
aid in committing suicide, no one can be convicted for offence under
Section 306, Indian Penal Code. To proceed against any person for
the offence under Section 306 Indian Penal Code it requires an active
act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide, seeing
no option and that act must have been intended to push the
deceased into such a position that he committed suicide. There is
nothing on record to show that the applicant was instigating and
harassing the deceased and further there is absolutely no material to
allege that the applicant abetted for suicide of the deceased within
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
the meaning of Section 306, Indian Penal Code.
22. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a
person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without
a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in
committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of
the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by the Supreme
Court is clear that in order to convict a person under Section 306
Indian Penal Code there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the
offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the
deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and that act must have
been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he
committed suicide.
23. By applying above law, the material available on record
shows that beside vague statements, there is nothing to indicate
positive act of the applicant, rather there are no circumstances which
could indicate that the applicant made deceased's life miserable by
his act compelling her to end her life. Pertinent to note that deceased
never left any suicidal note. Over all, material suggests that due to
refusal for marriage, deceased committed suicide under
Judgment 904 apl 1072.23
frustration. Moreover, the material indicates that the brother of
deceased was insisting for marriage, but since the applicant was
younger than 10 years from the deceased, there was refusal. True,
the incident was unfortunate, however we could not see the material
to make out prima facie case. In the circumstances, continuation of
prosecution amounts to abuse of the process of the Court.
24. In view of above, application is allowed, we hereby quash
and set aside FIR vide Crime No. 215/2023 registered with Police
Station Armori, Dist. Gadchiroli for the offence punishable under
Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and related Sessions Case No.
3/2024 pending on the file of learned Principal District and Sessions
Judge, Gadchiroli.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)
Gohane
Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 29/01/2024 19:36:55
