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

2022 Supreme(Guj) 1413

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.
Rajeshbhai @ Rajubhai @ Bav Jentibhai Chovatiya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat & 1 Others – Respondents
R/Special Criminal Application No. 632 of 2017
Decided on : 07-10-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR KANDRAP H. DHOLKIA, MR TUSHAR L SHETH
For the Respondents: MS MAITHILI MEHTA, Adv

Headnote:

CRIMINAL - ABETMENT OF SUICIDE - SECTION 306 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE - INGREDIENTS - ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS - INSTIGATION - INTENTION - EVIDENCE - BURDEN OF PROOF - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 107 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE - SCOPE OF EXERCISE OF POWER UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - QUASHING OF FIR AND CHARGE-SHEET.

Fact of the Case:

The deceased, Sumitraben, consumed acid and later died during treatment. Her husband, the complainant, filed a complaint against the writ-applicant, alleging that he had an illicit relationship with the deceased and threatened her to continue the relationship, which led her to commit suicide. The writ-applicant filed a discharge application, which was rejected by the Sessions Court.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the ingredients of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with abetment of suicide, were not satisfied in this case. It found that there was no evidence to show that the writ-applicant instigated or intentionally aided the deceased to commit suicide. The court also held that the statements of the witnesses were general in nature and did not provide any specific evidence of the writ-applicant's involvement in the deceased's suicide.

Issues: Whether the writ-applicant abetted the deceased to commit suicide.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution failed to establish the essential elements of abetment, namely, instigation, intention, and aiding, as required under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. The court also held that the evidence on record did not demonstrate any active role or direct act of the writ-applicant that led the deceased to commit suicide.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the FIR and charge-sheet against the writ-applicant under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

JUDGMENT :

1. By way of present writ-application the writ-applicant herein under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is seeking quashing of the F.I.R being C.R. No.I-19 of 2015 registered with Bhayavadar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sec. 306 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code as well as the charge-sheet dated 22.10.2015 and the Sessions case on the file. The writ-applicant herein also challenges the legality and validity of the order dated 01.09.2016 passed by the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot at Dhoraji below Exh.6 i.e. an application for discharge preferred by the writ-applicant herein which came to be rejected by the Court below.

2. The writ-applicant herein preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.23654 of 2015 before this Court seeking quashing of FIR under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which came to be withdrawn by the writ-applicant herein to avail alternative remedy by preferring discharge application. The writ-applicant preferred an application for discharge below Ex.6 before the Sessions Court at Dhoraji in Sessions Case No.26 of 2015 which came to be rejected by the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot at Dhoraji by order dated 1.9.2016.

3. The brief facts as stated by the writ-applicant, on 20.7.2015 accidental death came to be registered pertaining to suicide committed by the wife of the complainant at Rajkot Police.

3.1 On 22.7.2015, complainant - Atulbhai V Parmar lodged a complaint alleging that on 19.7.2015 all the family members were present at home around 10:30 when his wife - Sumitraben prepared tea for all of them and at around 10:45 his wife went to bathroom; thereafter she came out in the drawing room, at that time, she was about to vomit, so all members gathered near her - Sumitraben and asked about the problem. At that time Sumitraben had informed that she had consumed Acid. Thereafter Sumitraben was taken to Krishna Hospital, Upleta in the vehicle of neighbour Rameshbhai, thereafter she was taken to Rajkot at Sahyog Hospital for further treatment and on 20.7.2015 she passed away at 4:50 hours, at that time Rajkot Police Came and postmortem was carried out and the dead body was handed over to father-in-law.

3.2 It is alleged by the complainant herein that his friend Rajubhai @ Bav J Chovatiya was residing near his house; and Rajubhai was a Manager in a coal mine at Jharkhand, and Rajubhai had taken him to Jharkhand for service as a Supervisor, after about one and half month Rajubhai came to Bhayavadar for marriage of his elder brother.

3.3 It is further alleged that Rajubhai was visiting his home, when his wife was alone and had illicit relations with his wife. It is further alleged that neighbors came to know about this fact when he came from Jarkhand, his mother informed about the relation between Rajubhai and his wife - Sumitraben, so he asked his wife Sumitraben, who admitted that there was relation and told the complainant that she was threatened by Rajubhai by saying that your husband and children will be killed. It is further alleged that therefore on 18.7.2015 the complainant talked with Rajubhai for not to keep relation. It is further alleged that deceased Sumitraben was under fear that she will be ill-famed and therefore she consumed Acid and committed suicide.

4. Criminal Case No.743 of 2015 came to be registered for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and the same is registered as Sessions Case No.26 of 2015 which is pending before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajot.

5. Mr. Tushar Sheth, the learned advocate appearing for the writ-applicant herein submitted that the FIR as well as charge-sheet papers do not disclose as to how the writ-applicant can be held guilty for the offences punishable under Section 306 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code. The ingredients of the said provisions arraigned against

                  Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                  1
                  2
                  3
                  4
                  5
                  6
                  7
                  8
                  9
                  10
                  11
                  Judicial Analysis

                  AI

                  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