The main legal point established is the assessment of allegations of mental harassment and ill-treatment to determine if they amount to instigation for suicide, and the exercise of powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing FIRs.

JUDGMENT

A.M. Dhavale, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, taken up for final disposal at admission stage & heard finally.

2. Both the applications are for quashing of FIR bearing Crime No. 0268/2017 registered with M.I.D.C. CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under section 306, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.

3. Heard Shri. Joydeep Chatterji & Shri. Nilesh S. Ghanekar, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri. V. M. Kagne, learned APP for State and Shri. S. P. Brahme, learned counsel for respondent no. 2.

4. The FIR and police papers disclose that, deceased Kishor Parashar, aged 45 years, husband of informant, was serving as a Clerk in the office of Dy. Director of Education, Aurangabad. Accused no. 1 Vaijnath Khandke was Dy. Director (Education) while accused no. 2 Vidya Ghorpade is a Clerk in the same department. On 08.08.2017, deceased Kishor along with his wife Deepali left the house at 10:00 a.m. Deceased Kishor left his wife at the house of his sister and went towards the office but the inquiry by Deepali revealed that he had not reached the office. He was not accessible on mobile. At 03:00 p.m. when daughter Ruchika reached the house, she saw twowheeler of her father at the parking but the house was closed. On breaking open the house, it was revealed that Kishor had committed suicide by hanging himself from a ceiling fan. On the next day, Deepali lodged the FIR that her husband used to be under tremendous mental tension as he was overburdened with the work of four tables and was required to work upto 10:00 p.m. everyday. His salary was stopped by accused no.1 Vaijnath and he was always threatening and intimidating him. Accused no.2 Vidya was not efficient and she was getting all her work done from Kishor. Kishor was excellent in his work but due to overburden, stoppage of increment and humiliating treatment in the office, he committed suicide.

5. It is argued that, the allegations against the applicants even if taken at their face value, do not disclose any criminal intention on the part of both the applicants. The allegations do not make out any offence under section 306 IPC. There was no abetment by the applicants.

6. Per contra, learned APP and advocate Shri. S. P. Brahme argued that, the applicants by their behaviour created situation so as to create unbearable pressure by mental harassment and deceased Kishor was left with no option but to commit suicide.

7. After carefully considering the arguments and the judgments cited and the papers produced, we find that the power of quashing FIR can be exercised in sparing manner where there is a clear case of abuse of process of court and no material to allow the prosecution to be continued. In State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal [AIR 1992 SC 604] , seven criteria are given for exercising powers. Following two are material.

(i) The allegations taken at their face value do not constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(ii) The allegations are absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion of sufficiency of grounds.

8. We must make it clear that, appreciation of material for sufficiency can be only at cursory level and this Court while invoking powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot go into minute aspects. It should be left to the trial Judge to decide the merits and demerits of the facts alleged at the time of taking cognizance, framing of charge or final disposal.

9. The facts herein indicate that, there was no direct abetment and the applicants cannot have any intention that the deceased should commit suicide. Even when the accused persons have no such intention, if they create situation causing tremendous mental tension so as to drive the person to commit suicide, they can be said to be instigating the accused to commit suicide. It is akin to act imminently dangerous as described in Section 300(4) of IPC. As held in Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Chhattisgarh report