Point of Law: Challan quashed - Abetment of suicide - Mere words uttered by accused to deceased to go and die were not even prima facie enough to instigate deceased to commit suicide.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 561-A, now 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing the challan in case titled “State of Jammu & Kashmir (now) UT Vs Gauri Devi,” arising out of FIR No.152/2010 dated 14.08.2010 registered with Police Station Nowabad, Jammu for offences under Section 306 of the RPC, pending before the Court of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (hereinafter referred to as the “trial Court”) and also the order dated 12.03.2011, by virtue of which the charge for commission of offence under Section 306 has been framed against the petitioner.

2. It is stated that on 07.12.2009 at 01.30 p.m., the Police Post, Canal Road, received information from some reliable sources that one person, namely, Ghan Shyam, S/o Ajay Kumar, R/o Krishna Nagar, Jammu has seriously injured himself by stabbing himself in the chest and was taken to GMC, Jammu, who died en route. Since the matter pertained to the death of a human and cause was unknown, so the police after recording the said information as report No. 13 in the Roznamcha dated 07.12.2009 started inquest proceedings under Section 174 Cr. P.C. The dead body was recovered and the post-mortem was also conducted and thereafter the body of the deceased was handed over to the relatives of the deceased. The statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 175 Cr.P.C. and it was found that the deceased Ghan Shyam, aged 35-36 years was a street vendor and his mother-in-law i.e the petitioner herein, was also in the same business. The deceased had allegedly given Rs. 73,000/- as loan to his mother-in-law for the sake of her business and was himself indebted to many people, as he had also borrowed money from them for his business. The deceased used to be harassed by his lenders to clear his debts. Due to this reason, on 07.12.2009, the deceased demanded from the petitioner the money, which he had given to given to her as a loan and it led to verbal altercation between the deceased and his mother-in-law/petitioner and the deceased said that if the petitioner did not clear her dues towards him, he would kill himself, as he is being harassed by the debtors. On this, the petitioner told that at that point of time she had no money to return to the deceased and this prompted the deceased to take the extreme step by inflicting injury with knife in the chest.

3. After the conclusion of the inquest proceedings, FIR bearing No. 152/2010 dated 14.08.2010 was registered against the petitioner for commission of offence under Section 306 of the RPC. After the completion of the investigation, challan was filed and the same is pending before the Court of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu. It is further stated that the learned trial Court vide order dated 12.03.2011 framed the charges for commission of offences under Section 306 RPC against the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the challan as well as the order dated 12.03.2011 on the following grounds:-

a. That the FIR impugned has been registered after the delay of almost a year from the date of death of the deceased and deserves to be quashed.

b. That the offence under Section 306 is not made out at all in light of the various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the Hon’ble High Courts.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is not even an iota of evidence on record that the petitioner at any point of time abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased, as such, the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court are nothing but an abuse of process of law.

5. Per contra, Mr. Sawhney, learned AAG submits that the learned trial Court has passed the order of framing the charges on the basis of evidence before the Court and the instant petition deserved to be dismissed.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

7. The perusal of the charges framed by the learned trial Court on 12.11.2011 reads as under:-

“That on 07.12.2009, you were called by your son-in-law Ghan Shy