IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE, R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.
Gulab - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 164 of 2018
Decided On : 30-01-2019
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 226 and 227 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 306 and 107 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 32 - Torture Or Harassment - Committed Suicide - By this writ petition petitioner has prayed for quashment of first information report lodged by respondent with police station pursuant to which CR for offence punishable came to be registered - Respondent is widow of deceased - She lodged FIR impugned in this petition alleging therein that deceased had ancestral agricultural land - Petitioner and deceased by entering into a partnership started hotel business on said land - petitioner did not give accounts of hotel business - hotel was closed six months after it was opened on ground that partnership incurred loss in business - It is further alleged in FIR that petitioner started asking deceased to convey title of agricultural land in his name in consideration for expenditure incurred by him for construction of hotel premises - deceased had also received a notice of court proceeding initiated by petitioner - In response to notice deceased had been to court - Deceased had informed first informant that so as to ensure that suit instituted by petitioner against deceased would proceed exparte petitioner through his henchmen had prevented deceased from causing appearance in court proceeding - Held, Since had deceased really received threatening call from petitioner deceased would have made mention thereof in suicide note contents of suicide note in verbatim - What can be gathered from contents of suicide note is that deceased decided to end his life since petitioner claimed to have owed from him - There is not a whisper in suicide note that petitioner tortured deceased or gave threats to his life as alleged in FIR - Investigating Officer though collected call details record of cell phone of deceased he appears to have failed to locate alleged call - True it is unfortunate that deceased committed suicide - It is not a case of persistent torture or harassment of deceased - Allegations in FIR and contents of suicide note do not even remotely suggest that petitioner had ever tortured deceased with a view to drive him to commit suicide - As such on examination of entire material on record in light of relevant provisions of law and their interpretation we reach conclusion that there is no material to proceed against petitioner - It would be an abuse of process of law to allow investigation machinery to investigate into crime pursuant to FIR vide CR and ultimately prosecute petitioner therefor - Writ Petition Stands Disposed Of.
R.G. AVACHAT, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for parties and learned A.P.P., heard finally.
2. By this Writ Petition, under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashment of the First Information Report ("FIR", for short), lodged by respondent No.2 with Taluka Police Station, Ahmednagar, pursuant to which C.R. No.363/2017, for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code ("IPC", for short), came to be registered.
3. Respondent No.2 - Smt. Mandubai is the widow of the deceased - Santosh Bade. She lodged FIR, impugned in this petition, alleging therein that the deceased Subhash had ancestral agricultural land, being Gut No.163, situate at Chandbibi Mahal. The petitioner and the deceased, by entering into a partnership, started hotel business on the said land. The petitioner did not give accounts of the hotel business. The hotel was closed six months after it was opened, on the ground that the partnership incurred loss in the business. It is further alleged in the FIR that the petitioner started asking the deceased to convey the title of the agricultural land Gut No.163 in his name in consideration for the expenditure incurred by him for construction of hotel premises. The deceased had also received a notice of the court proceeding, initiated by the petitioner. In response to the notice, the deceased had been to the court. The deceased had informed the first informant that so as to ensure that the suit instituted by the petitioner against the deceased would proceed exparte, the petitioner through his henchmen had prevented the deceased from causing appearance in the court proceeding.
It is further alleged in the FIR that on 14th November, 2017, between 12.00 noon and 1.00 p.m., the petitioner called on the cell phone of the deceased. The first informant, the deceased and their daughter, Priyanka were at home. The deceased switched on the speaker of the cell phone. They heard the petitioner asked the deceased to come to his home, at Bhingar and transfer the agricultural land to him, lest he would see to him. It was a threatening call. On intervening night of 14th and 15th November, 2017, the deceased committed suicide by hanging from ceiling iron pipe, at his residence. A suicide note was found on the person of the deceased. It has been mentioned in the suicide note that the petitioner claimed the deceased to have owed him Rs.3,00,000/-.
According to the first informant, the deceased committed suicide due to harassment meted out to him by the petitioner.
4. Pursuant to the FIR, lodged by the widow of the deceased (first informant), crime vide C.R. No.363/2017 has been registered against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. The petitioner has, therefore, preferred this Writ Petition for quashment of the FIR.
5. Mr. K.C. Sant, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that a false FIR has been lodged with the police against the petitioner. The deceased had entered into an agreement with the petitioner on 4th December, 2012 for sale of his agricultural land. The entire consideration amount of Rs.60,000/- had already been paid to the deceased. Sale-deed was to be executed within a period of one year from the date of execution of the agreement for sale. Since the deceased did not keep his word, the petitioner instituted a suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division at Ahmednagar for specific performance of contract. The deceased had received suit summons. He did not appear before the Court. He has, therefore, been marked as exparte. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner did not have any reason to compel the deceased to commit suicide. NO ingredients of the offence of abetment of suicide are attracted. Learned counsel would further submit that even if the allegations in the FIR are taken as it is and read in its entirety, prima facie, no offence is disclo
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.