Nirmala vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 12174 MP

                              -1-


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                  AT I N D O R E
                              BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
              CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1856 of 2023

BETWEEN:-
   NIRMALA W/O MAHESH MALVIYA, AGED ABOUT
   49 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O 134,
1.
   MANGAL RESIDENCY LALPUR       NAGJHIRI
   UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
   MAHESH S/O NANURAM MALVIYA, AGED ABOUT
   59 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SECURITY GUARD 134,
2.
   MANGAL RESIDENCY, LALPUR, NAGJHIRI,
   UJJAIN, DIST. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
   MAHENDRA S/O MAHESH MALVIYA, AGED
   ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT 134,
3.
   MANGAL RESIDENCY, LALPUR, NAGJHIRI,
   UJJAIN, DIST. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                   .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI VIVEK SINGH-ADVOCATE) .


AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION
NAGJHIRI DISTT. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                 .....RESPONDENTS
( BY SHRI AMIT RAWAL-GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This revision coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
following:

      Heard and reserved on   :     17.07.2023

      Order Pronounced on     :     01.08.2023
                                -2-


                               ORDER

The applicants have filed a revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 06.04.2023 passed by 9thy Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, M.P. whereby charges under Section 306/34 of IPC has been framed against the applicants. 2- As per the prosecution story on 08.04.2022 between 12:00 to 12:10, the deceased Priya wife of Vinod committed suicide by hanging herself in her house. Since death was unnatural, therefore, merge under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. was registered at Police Station Nagjhiri District Ujjain. Police reached the spot along with FSL Officer, and photographer, recovered the body and sent it for the postmortem. The statement of Vinod (husband of the deceased), and Devnarayan (Father of the deceased) were recorded. They disclosed that the Nirmala residing with the neighbouring house used to quarrel with the deceased Priya due to which she was mentally perturbed. On the date of the incident, Nirmala and her husband did quarrel on the issue of throwing the garbage and threatening to lodge a report at SC/ST Police Station, therefore, they instigated the deceased Priya to commit suicide. On such information, merg was recorded. The postmortem report confirmed the death by way of hanging. Police recovered a suicide note which was said to have been written by the deceased in which she blamed these applicants for day to day torture. 3- On 15.04.2022, an FIR under Section 306/34 was registered against Nirmala and Mahesh. The State Examiner of Questioned Documents Government of Madhya Pradesh vide report dated 29.11.2022 confirmed the hand writing of the deceased in the suicide note. After completing the investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against

Nirmala, Mahesh and Mahendra for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of IPC.

Learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, vide order dated 06.04.2023 has framed the common charges under Section 306/34 which reproduced below: -

@@vkjksi&i=@@

eSa lquhy dqekj 'kkSd uoe l= U;k;k/kh'k] mTtSu] vki vfHk;qDr egs'k firk ukuwjke ekyoh; vk;q 54 o"kZ fuoklh 34] eaxy jslhMsalh ykyiqj] ukxf>jh] mTtSu e-iz- ij fuEukuqlkj vkjksi yxkrk gaw fd%&

fnukad 08-04-2022 dks eaxy jslhMsalh dkWyksuh] ykyiqj Fkkuk ukxf>jh ftyk mTtSu vUrxZr e`frdk fiz;k us Qkalh yxkdj vkRegR;k dj yh ftlds fy, vki mlds iM+kslh gksrs gq, vkius vkil esa feydj lkekU; vk'k; fufeZr dj mlds vxzlj.k esa e`frdk dks dpjk Qsadus dh ckrksa dks ysdj >xM+k dj mls 'kkjhfjd o ekufld :i ls izrkfM+r dj mls vkRegR;k ds fy, nq"izsfjr fd;kA vkidk mDr d`R; /kkjk 306@34 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds varxZr n.Muh; gksdj bl U;k;ky; ds laKku esa gSA vkSj ,rn~ }kjk vkjksi&i= ds ek/;e ls ;g funsZ'k nsrk gWw fd vkidk fopkj.k Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk dh /kkjk 306 @34 Hkkjrh; n.M lafgrk ds rgr n.Muh; vijk/k esa fd;k tk,A

¼lquhy dqekj 'kkSd½ uoe~ vij l= U;k;k/kh'k] mTtSu] e-iz-

@@vfHk;qDr dk vfHkokd@@ mDr vkjksi&i= vfHk;qDr dks i<+dj lquk;k o le>k;k tkus ij mldk dFku gS fd%&

¼lquhy dqekj 'kkSd½ uoe~ vij l= U;k;k/kh'k] mTtSu] e-iz-

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, applicants before this Court.

4- Shri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are neighbors and there was only a dispute between them about throwing the garbage but intention of inducement to commit suicide by torturing physically and mentally cannot be gathered. The ingredients of Section 306 of IPC are missing. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that, even if the entire allegation is accepted as it is the offence under section 306 is not made out. The Apex Court in catena of judgment has held that the degree of cruelty to constitute abatement under Section 306 of IPC would be higher than the degree of harassment and cruelty to constitute any other offence. The mens rea to commit is sine qua non to convict the person under Section 306 of IPC. Shri Singh learned counsel for the applicants further submits that Section 306 has two ingredients, firstly, suicidal death and secondly abatement thereof. It is nobody's case that including the husband of the deceased that these applicants used to torture her mentally and physically to provoke the deceased to commit suicide, hence, learned Sessions Judge has wrongly framed the charges under Section 306 of IPC and the applicants ought to have been discharged.

5- Learned counsel for the State contended that these applicants used to harass and torture the deceased and her husband. On the date of the incident, they threatened the deceased and her husband that they would send them to jail by lodging the report under the SC/ST Act and immediately Nirmala and her husband left by motorcycle due to which she got terrified and committed suicide. The neighbour Seema, Madhu Parmar, Lakhan Chouhan and Madhubal Chouhan in their statement recorded under Section161 of Cr.P.C. have stated that Nirmala Bai threatened to lodge a report, hence no interference is called for in this case.

Conclusions 6- As per contents of the FIR and statement of the witnesses that on 08.04.2021 near about 07:30 morning Nirmala was shouting loudly on the issue of the garbage lying in front of her house. The deceased Priya came out from the house and objected to it. Thereafter, the applicant / accused Mahesh caught hold of the colour of Vinod and threatened that he would send all of them behind the bar by lodging the FIR under the SC/ST Act. Thereafter, Mahesh and Nirmala (applicants) left the place in the scooter. The deceased got terrified, thereafter she was given a glass of water and pacified. At about 10:45, her husband Vinod went to the school of his son and came back home and found Priya hanging from the ceiling fan. He immediately called the neighbour and the police. According to them because of day-to-day quarrels and threats to lodge the report, she was mentally tortured which provoke her to commit suicide. As per the suicide note, the deceased was held responsible by the Malviya family for her death. According to her, today these applicants threatened her to lodge the report under SC/ST Act and for honor and self-respect she committed suicide after departure, they must be punished. The assault and threatening to lodge the police report cannot come under the category of instigation, provoke, or encourage to do an untoward act which that person would have otherwise not done. The Apex Court in catena of cases held that in order to punish under Section 306 of IPC for abatement. there must be mens rea in order to constitute abatement by instigation and there must be a direct inducement to do a culpable act as held by Apex Court in the case of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Senger Vs. State of M.P. reported (2002) 5 SCC

371. Even if it is taken to be proved that these applicants used to quarrel on the issue of throwing garbage, it cannot be said that they abetted the

deceased to commit suicide. No such criminal case lodged by these applicants has been brought on record. The deceased got terrified by the threats given by the applicants and committed suicide, therefore, in the considered opinion of this court, charges under Section 306/34 of IPC are not made.

7. Consequently, the revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 06.04.2023 framing charge against the Applicants under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code is set aside and the Applicants are accordingly discharged.

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned court for information.

(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE praveen

Digitally signed by PRAVEEN Date: 2023.08.03 18:37:52 +05'30'