SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(SC) 750

2010 (6) Supreme 376
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.S. Sirpurkar and Cyriac Joseph, JJ.
Madan Mohan Singh — Appellant
versus
State of Gujarat & Anr. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1291 of 2008
with
Crl. MP No. 12749 of 2008
Decided on : 17-8-2010

IMPORTANT POINT
Merely because a person had a grudge against his superior officer and committed suicide on account of that grudge, even honestly feeling that he was wronged, it would still not be a proper allegation for basing the charge under Section 306.

Headnote:(a) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – The suicide note or the FIR not containing anything which would even distantly be viewed as an offence – There is nothing in the FIR or in the so-called suicide note which could be suggested as abetment to commit suicide – High Court erred in dismissing the petition u/s 482. (Para 8)

        (b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 306 and 107 – In order to bring out an offence u/s 306 specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107 on the part of the accused with an intention to bring out the suicide of the concerned person as a result of that abetment is required – Intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this particular offence u/s 306. (Para 8)

        (c) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 306 – No nexus between the so called suicide and any of the alleged acts on the part of the appellant, no any proximity – In the prosecution u/s 306 much more material is required. (Para 9)

        (2005) 2 SCC 659 – Relied upon

        (d) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – No word about Section 294(b) IPC in the FIR or even in the so-called suicide note – Merely because a person had a grudge against his superior officer and committed suicide on account of that grudge, even honestly feeling that he was wronged, it would still not be a proper allegation for basing the charge under Section 306 – The FIR ought to have been quashed. (Para 11)

        1992 Suppl. 1 SCC 335 – Relied upon

       Facts of the case:

        1. FIR was lodged against the accused u/s 306 and 294(b), IPC.

        2. He challenged the FIR and sought quashing of the same. His application u/s 482 Cr. P.C was dismissed by the High Court.

       Finding of the Court:

        Impugned order cannot be sustained.

       Result : Appeal allowed.

       

JUDGMENT

V.S. Sirpurkar, J. —

1. The accused who faces prosecution for offences under Section 306 and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) comes up before us being aggrieved by the High Court judgment by which his petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was dismissed. In that petition the accused/appellant had challenged the First Information Report (FIR) registered as C.R. No. 166 of 2008 at Naranpura Police Station.

2. The said FIR is a long document which has been filed by one Harshida Ben, widow of Deepakbhai Krishnalal Joshi. It is apparent from the said report that she was married to Deepakbhai Krishnalal Joshi serving in Ahmedabad Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. as a driver in the Microwave Project Department. He had undergone a heart bypass surgery in the year 2002 and he was asked by the doctor to avoid lifting heavy weights. She further stated that the appellant, Madan Mohan Singh was working as a D.E.T. and her husband who was driving a Tata Sumo car was working under Madan Mohan Singh (accused herein). She then complained that Madan Mohan Singh used to tell his private errands to her husband and was harassing him. Though Madan Mohan Singh was transferred, yet he kept on continuously using her husband. In the year 2007, Madam Mohan Singh came back on transfer in the Microwave Project as D.E.T. It is alleged that on the day when Madan Mohan Singh joined, he told her husband to keep the keys of the vehicle on the table. However, according to her, her husband did not listen to that and took back the key on account of which Madan Mohan Singh had become angry and had threatened her husband of suspending him. He also rebuked her husband that if he did not listen to him, he would create difficulties for her husband. Madan Mohan Singh said to her husband as how he is still alive inspite of the insults. It is then contended that on 21.2.2008, her husband left at 10’O Clock as per rules with tiffin but did not return back in the evening and, therefore, his search was taken by his son Jatin from his colleagues like Raji Saheb and his absence was reported to the police on 22.2.2008 and 23.2.2008. Ultimately, she came to know that her husband’s body was lying in the dead condition in the vehicle No. GJ 1 G 3472 at Kiran Park opposite Gayatri Hospital, New Vadaj. She also suggested further that a telephone call had come from Gujarat High Court informing her that there was a Xerox copy of the suicide note. Lastly, it is stated that during the period between 2003 to 21.2.2008 the Head of the department D.E.T. Project was entrusting his house work to her husband but her husband had not done the work entrusted to him and, therefore, he had bias against her husband and insulted him in front of the staff several times and because of this her husband got depressed and committed suicide.

3. This First Information Report was filed and registered on 17.3.2008 i.e. after the 24 days of the death of her husband. It is this report which is challenged suggesting that even if the whole report is accepted as it is, it did not disclose any offence much less the offences under Sections 306 and 294, IPC. Since, the Gujarat High Court did not agree and dismissed the petition; the appellant is before us now.

4. Shri K.T.S. Tulsi, learned Senior Advocate took us through the FIR in which there is reference to a suicide note allegedly written by the deceased, a Xerox copy of which was produced by the complainant. The copy of that suicide note was filed before us. It seems to be a letter dated 4.2.2008 written to the Chief General Manager, Telecom Project. It is a huge complaint in which the incident dated 15.10.2007 was mentioned when allegedly the appellant asked the driver to keep the keys of the vehicle on the table and not to take away them. There is also a complaint against the working style of the Madan Mohan Singh by the driver. There is one significant sentence I was put under mental tension by M.M. Singh. Without any concrete proof and evidence I was p










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top