Kailash Narayan Shukla vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6778 MP

                                                                                 1
                                                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                        AT INDORE
                                                                             BEFORE
                                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
                                                                          ON THE 6th OF MAY, 2022

                                                             MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 22659 of 2022

                                                     Between:-
                                                     KAILASH NARAYAN SHUKLA S/O VIJAY NARAYAN
                                                     SHUKLA , AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                                     GOVT. SERVANT 27, BHARTIYA GRIHNIRMAN
                                                     COLONY, MOTI BUNGALOW (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                                 .....PETITIONER
                                                     (BY SHRI VIVEK SINGH, ADVOCATE)

                                                     AND

                                                     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                                     HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
                                                     CIVIL LINE (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                              .....RESPONDENTS
                                                     (BY SHRI RAJESH JOSHI, GA FOR THE STATE )

                                                  This PETITION coming on for ADMISSION this day, but with the consent
                                            of parties, heard finally and the court passed the following:
                                                                                  ORDER

Present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under section 482

of Cr.P.C. for quashment of the Criminal Case registered at S.T. No.31/2020 pending Before II ASJ, Dewas alongwith all subsequent proceedings pending against the petitioner under Section 306 and 120-B of IPC.

According to the prosecution story, on 19.12.2016, one Kailash Prasad Yadav resident of District Dewas has committed suicide by self immolation. The allegations against the petitioner are that the deceased had borrowed huge amount from various persons including the present petitioner. It is further alleged by the prosecution that the deceased was feeling harassed because of the regular demands made by the petitioner and other persons with regard to repayment of loan amount/borrowed amount due to which he has committed suicide. Thereafter, after the detailed enquiry, the petitioner was implicated in the present case.

Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.05.09

has implicated falsely in the present case. The petitioner has been implicated only 11:41:32 IST

on the ground that he has given loan to the deceased, there is no direct or indirect

evidence to connect the petitioner with the present applicant in the given facts and circumstances of case and the material available on record. It is also submitted that the petitioner was implicated only on the basis of his name mentioned in a diary which has been recovered from house of the deceased in which he used to write

the entries of the amount borrowed from many persons. It is further submitted that there is absolutely no evidence of harassment or causing abetment to the deceased. Even dying declaration does not speak about the present petitioner and the deceased does not speak anything about the present petitioner in his dying declaration regarding any harassment, hence, there is no parameters of 'abetment' which has been stated in Section 107 of IPC. Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance in judgment of Chitresh Kumar Chopra vs. State of (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) reported in 2009 (16) SCC 605 where the person can be said to have abetted in doing a thing if he, firstly , instigates any person to do that thing; or secondly, engaged with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if any 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. There is no ingredients of Section 306 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further placed reliance over the judgments passed by apex Court in the case of S.S. Chena vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan & Another reported in 2010 (12) SCC 190, Gangula Mohan Reddy vs. State of A.P. reported in (2010) 1 SCC 750.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer by submitting that the petitioner in connivance with other co-accused person has harassed the deceased due to which he has committed suicide. The deceased has clearly mentioned his name in the dying declaration that he alongwith other persons have harassed the deceased due to non-payment of amount. In their statements recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., wife and sister of the deceased have leveled specific allegations against the petitioner that he has harassed the the deceased due to Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.05.09 which, he has committed suicide. Hence, the learned Court below has rightly 11:41:32 IST

framed the charges against the petitioners.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. In the case of Rajesh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh passed in CRR No.3155/2011 decided on 09.07.2019, this Court has observed in para no.13, as under:-

13.............. "For framing charges under Section 306 of IPC there has to be a mens rea to impel or incite the subject to commit suicide. It is also requires an active or direct act, which lead the deceased to commit suicide and this act mush push the deceased into such a position that he sees no option except to annihilate his own life."

I n the case in hand, except the diary which was being maintained by the deceased, there is nothing on record to show that the deceased was being harassed directly either by the petitioner or by any other source to impel the deceased to commit suicide. Even, the statements of the witnesses i.e. wife and daughter of the deceased has also not stated anything against the petitioner except the omnibus allegations as reflecting in the diary or dying declaration of the deceased. Hence, in view of the settled law in the case of Rajesh (Supra), the petition is allowed.

Hence, the proceedings pending in ST No.31/202before Second ASJ, District Dewas under Section 306 and 120-B of IPC as well subsequent proceedings are hereby quashed.

With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed off. Copy of this order be sent to the trial court concerned for information. Certified copy, as per rules.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE amit

Signature Not Verified VerifiedDigitally Digitally signed by SAN AMIT KUMAR Date: 2022.05.09 11:41:32 IST