Gujarat High Court
Patel Joshnaben Pravinkumar vs State Of Gujarat on 16 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6654/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 6654 of 2020
==========================================================
PATEL JOSHNABEN PRAVINKUMAR & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. BK. RAJ(3794) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR P B KHAMBHOLJA(5730) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. SOAHAM JOSHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 16/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the
petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR being C.R.
No.119930042001154 of 2020 registered with Bhachau Police
Station, Kutch for the offences punishable under Sections 306, and
114 of the IPC.
2. Shorn of non-essential details, the relevant factual matrix of
the lis in hand is adumbrated, thus: The complainant and his younger
brother Bharatbhai were both serving as primary school teachers at
Kabrau, Bhachau Taluka. Bharatbhai was residing in a rented house
at Krishnanagar, Kabrau, along with his wife Shraddhaben and their
minor son. On 02.03.2020, Shraddhaben left the matrimonial home
without informing anyone, leading to a missing person report at
Bhachau Police Station. She reappeared on 05.03.2020 in the
company of her parents and relatives, whereupon she was taken to
Ahmedabad on the pretext of making her swear an oath. Thereafter,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6654/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
Bharatbhai began facing persistent threats, taunts and mental
harassment from his in-laws--namely, his mother-in-law Joshnaben,
father-in-law Pravinbhai, and brother-in-law Jatinbhai--who
repeatedly pressurised him with threats of divorce and served him
with a notice of maintenance.
2.1. On 20.03.2020, at about 12:15 p.m., Bharatbhai's colleague
informed the complainant that Bharatbhai had committed suicide by
hanging himself in his rented premises at Kabrau. A suicide note
was recovered during the inquest proceedings. The complainant
attributes the extreme step to the relentless mental torture,
humiliation and defamation inflicted upon the deceased by his in-
laws, which allegedly drove him to end his life. Accordingly, the
complainant lodged the present FIR seeking action against the
aforesaid accused persons under Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit, at
the very outset, that even if the allegations in the FIR are taken at
their face value, the same do not, by any stretch of legal imagination,
disclose the essential ingredients so as to constitute an offence
punishable under Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
The factual milieu, as delineated in the complaint, is utterly devoid
of any proximate act, instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid on the
part of the petitioners which could have impelled the deceased to
take the extreme step of self-destruction. Mere allegations of
domestic discord, trivial quarrels, strained relations, or exchange of
harsh words cannot, in absence whereof, sustain a charge of
abetment to suicide.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6654/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
3.1. In support of his submissions, the learned advocate for the
petitioners has placed reliance upon the authoritative
pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chandran
Ratnawami v. K.C. Palanisamy and Others, (2013) 6 SCC 740,
as also in Inder Mohan Goswami and Another v. State of
Uttaranchal and Others, (2007) 12 SCC 1.
3.2. In the background of the above submission, learned advocate
for the petitioners submitted to allow the present petition.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent would, at the
very threshold, controvert the submissions advanced on behalf of the
petitioners by contending that the FIR, read in its entirety, does
disclose the commission of a cognizable offence punishable under
Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint
narrates, in no uncertain terms, that the deceased was subjected to
persistent mental harassment, humiliation, and threats at the hands of
his in-laws, who not only took his wife away under a false pretext
but thereafter repeatedly pressurised him with threats of divorce and
served upon him a notice of maintenance, thereby lowering him in
the eyes of society. The suicide note recovered during the inquest
proceedings further fortifies the causal nexus between the acts of the
accused and the extreme step taken by the deceased.
4.1. In this factual backdrop, it is submitted that the present
petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. The
petitioners cannot seek to avoid trial when specific allegations,
coupled with the recovery of a suicide note, prima facie establish
their role in abetting the suicide of the deceased. Ergo, it is
submitted to dismiss the present petition and permit the prosecution
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6654/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
to take its lawful course.
5. Learned APP, while adopting the submissions canvassed by
the learned advocate for the respondent-complainant, would further
submit that the allegations in the FIR, when read as a whole, clearly
prima facie disclose the commission of an offence under Sections
306 and 114 of the IPC. The recovery of a suicide note during the
inquest proceedings strengthens the prosecution case and establishes
a direct nexus between the alleged conduct of the accused and the
act of suicide.
5.1. Accordingly, the learned APP submits that the present petition,
being devoid of merits, deserves to be dismissed in limine, and the
investigation/prosecution be allowed to proceed unhindered.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for both sides and upon
bestowing anxious consideration to the submissions advanced and
the material available on record, it is pertinent to note that the
present petition has been instituted at the very threshold,
immediately after the registration of the FIR. The investigation has
not progressed to any substantial stage.
6.1. At present, the prosecution seeks to rely upon two material
documents, namely, the FIR and the suicide note. In the FIR, the
complainant attributes the cause of suicide to the alleged pressure
exerted by the petitioners upon the deceased, compelling him to shift
to Ahmedabad to reside with his wife.
7. The suicide note, written in Gujarati, has also been placed on
record. In paragraph 3 thereof, the deceased has specifically alleged
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6654/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
that he was weary of the interference of the petitioners and has
directly attributed responsibility for his death to them. The tenor of
the suicide note reveals both his anguish and emotional distress,
coupled with an expression of love for his wife.
8. It is trite that to constitute an offence under Section 306 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860, the ingredients of abetment as
contemplated under Section 107 IPC must be fulfilled. In Praveen v.
State of Uttaranchal [All 2024 (7)], the Court observed that the
offence of abetment by instigation hinges upon the intention of the
abettor and not merely upon the act of the person abetted. Abetment
may be through instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid, as
delineated under Section 107 IPC.
9. In the present case, a prima facie reading of the suicide note, in
tandem with the FIR, indicates that the deceased ascribed his drastic
step to the pressure allegedly exerted by the petitioners. At this
incipient stage, such material suffices to permit continuation of the
investigation.
10. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Skoda Auto
Volkswagen India Private Ltd. v/ s. State of Uttar Pradesh [2020
SCC Online SC 958], in para 41 has held as under :-
"41. It is needless to point out that ever since the decision of
the Privy Council in King Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmed
AIR 1945 PC 18, the law is well settled that Courts would
not thwart any investigation. It is only in cases where no
cognizable offence or offence of any kind is disclosed in the
first information report that the Court will not permit an
investigation to go on. As cautioned by this Court in State of
Haryana v. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the power of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6654/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
quashing should be exercised very sparingly and with
circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases. While
examining a complaint, the quashing of which is sought, the
Court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or
genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR
or in the complaint. In S.M. Datta v. State of Gujarat (2001)
7 SCC 659 this Court again cautioned that criminal
proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage.
Quashing of a complaint should rather be an exception and a
rarity than an ordinary rule. In S.M. Datta (supra), this Court
held that if a perusal of the first information report leads to
disclosure of an offence even broadly, law courts are barred
from usurping the jurisdiction of the police, since the two
organs of the State operate in two specific spheres of
activities and one ought not to tread over the other sphere."
11. In Ajay Malik v. State of Uttarakhand, 2025 SCC OnLine
SC 185, the Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the position of law for
quashing the FIR as under:-
"8. It is well established that a High Court, in exercising its
extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, may issue
orders to prevent the abuse of court processes or to secure the
ends of justice. These inherent powers are neither controlled nor
limited by any other statutory provision. However, given the
broad and profound nature of this authority, the High Court
must exercise it sparingly. The conditions for invoking such
powers are embedded within Section 482 of the CrPC itself,
allowing the High Court to act only in cases of clear abuse of
process or where intervention is essential to uphold the ends of
justice.
9. It is in this backdrop that this Court, over the course of
several decades, has laid down the principles and guidelines that
High Courts must follow before quashing criminal proceedings
at the threshold, thereby pre-empting the Prosecution from
building its case before the Trial Court. The grounds for
quashing, inter alia, contemplate the following situations : (i)
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6654/2020 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
the criminal complaint has been filed with mala fides; (ii) the
FIR represents an abuse of the legal process; (iii) no prima facie
offence is made out; (iv) the dispute is civil in nature; (v.) the
complaint contains vague and omnibus allegations; and (vi) the
parties are willing to settle and compound the dispute amicably
(State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335)."
12. It would be apposite to refer the judgment rendered by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan
Lal, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, wherein, in Paragraph
103, it is held as under:-
"103. We also give a note of caution to the effect that the
power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be
exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that
too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be
iustified in embarkina udon an enauirv as to the reliability or
genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR
or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent
powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to
act according to its whim or caprice."
13. In the backdrop of the aforesaid legal position and the factual
milieu, this Court finds no compelling reason to interdict the
investigation at this nascent stage. Ergo, the petition does not merit
acceptance.
14. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, the present petition is
DISMISSED. Rule/Notice, if any, stands discharged. Interim relief,
if any, stands vacated.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
MANISH MISHRA
