Haji Mustaq vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 6541 MP

                                                              1
                           IN     THE       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                 ON THE 24 th OF APRIL, 2023
                                         MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 32699 of 2022

                          BETWEEN:-
                          HAJI MUSTAQ S/O SHRI FAKIR MOHAMMAD, AGED
                          ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS 454,
                          MISHRILAL NAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPLICANT
                          (BY SHRI ABHINAV DIXIT, ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANT)

                          AND
                          1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
                                CIVIL LINE DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                          2.    SMT. RATNWALI W/O LATE KAILASH PRASAD
                                YADAV, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                HOUSEWIFE 154, LIG, VIJAY NAGAR (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI H.S. RATHORE, ADVOCATE FOR STATE)

                                This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the

                          following:
                                                               ORDER

Heard on IA No.15699/2022 which is an application for deleting the name of respondent No.2.

It is submitted that as per the information the respondent No.2 has died. This fact is supported by an affidavit of the applicant.

Considering the same, the application is allowed. The applicant is directed to delete the respondent No.2 and as a Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARUN NAIR Signing time: 4/25/2023 11:03:02 AM

consequence thereof, the application for urgent hearing stands disposed of.

With the consent of parties, matter is finally heard. 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.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly placed co- accused persons namely; Manohar Madhwani, Kailash Shukla, Radha Vallabh Singh and Mohan Singh Rajput has been acquitted from the charges and their application has been allowed. He has placed reliance on the order dated 10.05.2022 passed in MCRC No.23522 of 2022 passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in respect of Manohar Madhwani has been allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is innocent and has implicated falsely in the present case. The petitioner has been implicated only 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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARUN NAIR Signing time: 4/25/2023 11:03:02 AM

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

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARUN NAIR Signing time: 4/25/2023 11:03:02 AM

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 which, he has committed suicide. Hence, the learned Court below has rightly framed the charges against the petitioner.

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."

In 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.31/2020 before Second ASJ, District Dewas under Section 306 and 120-B of IPC as well as subsequent proceedings against the present petitioner are hereby quashed.

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

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARUN NAIR Signing time: 4/25/2023 11:03:02 AM

Certified copy, as per rules.

(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE Arun/-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ARUN NAIR Signing time: 4/25/2023 11:03:02 AM