Punjab-Haryana High Court
Subhash Chander And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Others on 5 December, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155433
CRM-M No. 21356 of 2023 (O&M) -1- 2023:PHHC:155433
269
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No. 21356 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 05.12.2023
Subhash Chander and others
.......... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
.......... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. Gurlal Singh Dhillon, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
Mr. Vishal Singh Chauhan, Advocate
for respondent No. 2.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
By way of present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the
petitioners pray for quashing of case FIR No. 0042 dated 22.03.2016
(Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 306 and 34 of IPC, Police Station
Division 2, District Police Commissionerate Jalandhar, alongwith all
consequential proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of
compromise dated 15.04.2023 (Annexure P-3).
[2] As per allegations levelled in the FIR, Ashok Kumar who
happened to be the brother of complainant, committed suicide as he was
being pressed by the petitioners for returning the money, which was
outstanding with the deceased-Ashok Kumar.
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155433
CRM-M No. 21356 of 2023 (O&M) -2- 2023:PHHC:155433
[3] This Court, while issuing notice of motion vide order dated
28.04.2023, directed the parties to appear before trial Court for getting their
statements recorded as regards the veracity of compromise arrived at
between them.
[4] In pursuance of the aforesaid order dated 28.04.2023, a report
dated 20.05.2023 has been received from the concerned Court, stating that
compromise effected between the parties is genuine, voluntary and without
any coercion or undue influence. None of the accused have been declared as
proclaimed offender.
[5] Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that once, a
compromise has been arrived at between the parties without any pressure
and respondent No.2 has no objection as regards quashing of FIR as well as
all other subsequent proceedings arising out of the same against the
petitioners; the dispute purely personal in nature, there does not appear to be
any impediment as regards quashing of present FIR. He also submits that
even, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties,
particularly under the circumstances wherein the alleged offences have no
societal interest involved, it would be appropriate to render complete quietus
to the aforementioned dispute by quashing the FIR on the basis of
compromise entered into between the parties. Learned counsel for petitioner
also relies upon a judgment passed by this Court in CRM-M-37957-2015
titled as "Harmesh Singh and Anr. Vs. State of Punjab and Anr." decided
on 09.02.2017.
[6] On the other hand, learned State Counsel submits that
allegations in the present FIR are of serious nature and he opposes the prayer
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155433
CRM-M No. 21356 of 2023 (O&M) -3- 2023:PHHC:155433
made in the petition.
[7] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through
the records including the contents of the FIR, the compromise and the report
dated 20.05.2023. Although, quashing of FIR has been sought on the basis of
compromise, however, even on merits, perusal of the contents thereof if
taken to be at their face value, offence under Section 306 IPC is not made
out against the petitioners. Undisputedly, as per allegations, the petitioners
were merely asking for return of their money from the deceased, which, in
the given situation, is part of natural behaviour; a lender being legally
entitled to ask for return of the amount, and that, in the given circumstances,
cannot be treated as instigation / inducement. Support can be drawn from a
Division Bench's judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case titled
"Shri Subhash Ramgopal Bharuka and others Versus The State of
Maharashtra and others", 2020 ALL MR (Cri) 4194. Relevant para-13 of
the said judgment is re-produced hereunder:-
" The position of law given in aforesaid cases show
that intention a kind of mens-rea needs to be there for use
of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. For proving the
abetment of suicide, which is made punishable under
Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 107 of
the Indian Penal Code needs to be used and if there is
nothing to show that there was such intention in existence
of the accused, he cannot be prosecuted for the offence of
abetment of suicide. The matters of committing suicide by
debtors when it becomes impossible to return the debt are
increasing day by day. Many persons help their friends
and others by giving hand loan or by selling goods on
credit. They are bound to ask the debtor to pay the dues. If
the debtor feels such demand as harassment, on the basis
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155433
CRM-M No. 21356 of 2023 (O&M) -4- 2023:PHHC:155433
of that circumstance, inference cannot be drawn that
situation was created by the creditors due to which no
other alternative was left to the debtor than to commit
suicide. If he finds himself unable to return the amount
and he takes such step, the persons who are entitled to
recover the amount and who have prosecuted legal action,
which is permissible under law, cannot be blamed for
suicide of such person even if he has blamed such persons
for suicide in suicide note like present one. If the Court
goes with the presumption, in such cases, that inference is
possible of abetment as defined in Section 107 of the
Indian Penal Code, the intention behind the provision of
Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code will become otiose.
In the given circumstances as well, there is no direct or active
act of the petitioners which led to suicide. There has been no intentional act
of aiding or facilitating the deceased to commit suicide and end his life,
seeing no other option. The ingredients of abetment are thus missing with no
presence of mens rea.
[8] Moreover, the parties having settled their dispute so as to live in
peace in future, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further
with the criminal proceedings. In light of above developments, no cause
remains for the trial Court to invest further time and effort in adjudicating
this FIR. The compromise in question is even found to be fully in
consonance with the directions issued by this Court in Kulwinder Singh &
Ors. Vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh
Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543.
[9] Thus, in view of the discussions made hereinabove besides the
aforesaid report, accompanied by statements of both the parties as well as
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155433
CRM-M No. 21356 of 2023 (O&M) -5- 2023:PHHC:155433
keeping in mind the law laid down in the aforementioned judgments, the
petition is allowed and the FIR (supra) as also consequential proceedings
arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
[10] The aforesaid order shall, however, be subject to payment of
costs of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner(s) with the Punjab and
Haryana High Court Bar Association, Chandigarh, within a period of two
weeks from today.
December 05, 2023 ( HARKESH MANUJA )
'dk kamra' JUDGE
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155433
5 of 5
