Vadiampudi Varalaxmi , Laxmi And 2 ... vs The State Of Telangana And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 1448 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 1448 Tel
Judgement Date : 8 April, 2024

Telangana High Court

Vadiampudi Varalaxmi , Laxmi And 2 ... vs The State Of Telangana And Another on 8 April, 2024

     THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
        CRIMINAL PETITION No.7030 OF 2022
ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') to quash

the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in

P.R.C.No.332 of 2020, on the file of the learned IX Additional

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, registered for the

offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC').

2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/de facto

complainant lodged a complaint before the Police,

Chikkadpally Rural Police Station, Hyderabad, against the

petitioners stating that the deceased was her husband. Since

he is facing financial problems and unable to pay his debts,

he took loan from the petitioners and from the banks. The

deceased was paying three rupees interest every month to the

petitioners. In spite of that they are frequently calling the

deceased for more money than the interest paid. Because of

the unbearable harassment, the deceased committed suicide

by consuming poison. Basing on the said complaint, the

Police registered a case in Crime No.157 of 2018 for the

SKS,J

offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC and after

completion of investigation, they filed charge sheet before the

IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

3. Heard Sri C. Sharan Reddy, learned counsel appearing

on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri S. Ganesh, learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent

No.1-State. Though notice served upon respondent No.2,

none appeared on his behalf.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners

submitted that initially the case was registered for the offence

under Section 174 of Cr.P.C, whereas, the witnesses deposed

that the deceased committed suicide due to the financial

problems. After two months, the Police improvised their

statements stating that due to unbearable harassment of the

petitioners only the deceased committed suicide. The

statement of witnesses clearly proves the intention of

respondent No.2 to avoid payment to the petitioners and as

such, she filed the complaint.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted

that the allegations levelled against the petitioners are vague

and there is no evidence to prove that the petitioners harassed

SKS,J

the deceased due to which he committed suicide. Learned

counsel further submitted that without proper investigation,

police filed charge-sheet. Therefore, prayed the Court to

quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor

submitted that the alleged allegation shows that the

petitioners harassed the deceased, due to which, the deceased

committed suicide. Whether the harassment amounts to

instigation requires trial. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be

said that the offence under Section 306 of IPC does not

constitute. Hence, prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.

7. Having regard to the rival submissions made by both

the learned counsel and having gone through the material

available on record, to quash the proceedings under Section

482 of Cr.P.C, the Court has to see whether the averments in

the complaint prima facie shows that it constitute the offence

as alleged by the Police.

8. At this stage, it is pertinent to note the Judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs.

SKS,J

Surendra Kori 1, wherein in paragraph No.14 it is held as

follows:

"The High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not function as a Court of appeal or revision. This Court has, in several judgments, held that the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., though wide, has to be used sparingly, carefully and with caution. The High Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., should normally refrain from giving a prima facie decision in a case where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence has not been collected and produced before the Court and the issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of wide magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material."

9. Section 306 of the IPC reads as under:

"306. Abetment of suicide:- If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."

(2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 155

SKS,J

10. To prove the offence under Section 306 of IPC, the

prosecution has to prove that the deceased committed suicide

due to the abetment of the petitioner/accused. Section 107 of

IPC defines abetment to mean that a person abets the doing of

a thing, if he, firstly, instigates any person to do that thing;

secondly, engages with one or more other persons in any

conspiracy for the doing of that thing; thirdly, by an act or

illegal omission, the doing of that thing.

11. In the present case, there were disputes between the

petitioners and the deceased. The complaint and the