Back
B.K. Shrivastava, J.
Digvijay Singh & Others v. State of M. P. & Another
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 33397of 2018(Jabalpur);
Decided on17.3.2020
(1) Criminal P. C., 1973 -- S. 482 -- scope -- quashing of prosecution sought at initial stage -- test to be applied -- whether uncontroverted allegations prima facie establish offence -- inherent power should not be exercised to stifle legitimate prosecution -- conclusion of Court that registration of FIR and continuance of criminal case against applicant is gross abuse of process of law -- can use power u/s. 482 to quash FIR and further proceedings -- FIR for heinous offence affecting society at large cannot be quashed merely on presumption that there is no chance of conviction -- jurisdiction ordinarily exercised if allegations, even if taken to be correct, do not make out any offence -- not proper to analyse case of complainant in light of all probabilities to determine whether conviction would be sustainable -- High Court being highest Court of State, should normally refrain from giving prima facie decision where entire facts are incomplete and hazy -- more so when evidence has not been collected and produced before Court and issues involved, whether factual or legal, are of magnitude and cannot be seen in their true perspective without sufficient material. AIR 1964 SC 1, (1992)4 SCC 305, (1977)4 SCC 451, AIR 1960 SC 866, (1976) 3SCC 736, AIR 1977 SC1489, (1977) 4 SCC551, (1981)2 SCC 454 AIR 1981 SC 1164, 1983(1) SCC 1 AIR 1983 SC 67, AIR 1987 SC 877, Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia(1988)1 SCC 692, (1992)1 (Supp.)SCC 335, AIR 2003 SC1386, (2004) 6 SCC 522, (2005)1 SCC 122, (2005) 13 SCC 540, AIR 2007SC (Supp.) 231, 2007 AIR SCW 4555, 2008 AIR SCW 1649, AIR 2009 SC 2646, (2009) 7 SCC495, AIR 2010 SC 3762, (2010)11 SCC 226, (2013)3 SCC 330, AIR 2018 SC 1923 and 2019 (4) JLJ 85 (SC) followed. AIR 1945 PC 18 and AIR 1945 PC 94 relied on. [Para 35
(2) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 306 and 107 -- to constitute offence u/s. 306, prosecution has to establish that -- (i) person committed suicide -- (ii) such suicide was abetted by accused -- offence u/s. 306 would stand only if thereis "abetment". [Para 40
(3) Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 306 r/w S. 107 -- person instigates another person to commit suicide -- as a result, other person commits suicide -- person causing instigation liable to be punished u/s. 306 for abetting suicide -- before person can be convicted of abetting suicide of any other person, it must be established that such other person committed suicide. [Para 41
(4) Penal Code, 1860 -- S.107 -- abetment -- instigating any person to do that thing -- or -- engaging with one or more other person or persons in conspiracy for doing that thing -- or -- intentionally aiding doing of that thing by act or illegal omission -- wilful misrepresentation or concealment of material fact which he is bound to disclose, may also come within "abetment" -- direct involvement in commission of offence of suicide is essential. [Para 42
(5) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 306/34 and 498A -- only on basis of separate living of accused, it cannot be believed that he could not participate in crime. [Para 69
(6) Criminal P. C., 1973 -- S. 482 -- Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 306/34 and 107 -- quashing of prosecution -- deceased admitted in hospital on 23.4.2018 -- dying declaration and statement u/s. 161,CrPC that burns caused by falling of lamp -- date mentioned on dying declaration is 22.4.2018 -- statement started on 12:49 pm while Medical Officer wrote 12:49 pm after recording of statement -- prima facie appears that doctor gave back-dated certificate -- doubt created -- may be resolved or justified only by elaborate statement before trial Court -- prima facie this statement cannot be made basis for quashing FIR -- all accused continuously created pressure upon deceased to take money from her parents -- beat her from time to time -- did not give her ornaments -- by their acts or omissions or by continued course of conduct, created such circumstances that deceased was left with no option except to commit suicide -- sufficient material available to proceed further -- not a fit case to exercise powers u/s. 482 of CrPC for quashing FIR. AIR 2001 SC 3837, AIR 2010 SC 1446, AIR 1994 SC 1418, S.S. (2010) 12 SCC 190, AIR 2002 SC 3270, AIR 2008 SC 3212, AIR 2009 SC 1828, (2010)10 SCC 353, AIR 2011 SC 3024, (2010) SCC 628, (2011)3 SCC 626, (2017) 1 SCC 433 and 2019 SCC Online SC 44 followed. 2009(1) JLJ 236, 1997 MPLJ (2) SN 11, 2000 (2) MPLJ (SN) 23 and 2000 (4) MPHT 277 relied on. (1994)1 SCC 73, (2009) 16 SCC 605, (2012) 9 SCC 734, (2010)1 SCC 750, 1984 (2) Crimes 787 and 1971 JLJ SN 80 referred to. [Paras 67, 71 & 72
¼1½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 482 && O;kfIr && vkjafHkd izØe ij vfHk;kstu dk vfHk[kaMu bZfIlr && ykxw dh tkus okyh dlkSfV;k¡ && v[kafMr vfHkdFkuksa ls izFken`"V~;k vijk/k LFkkfir gksrk gS ;k ugha && varfuZfgr 'kfDr fofèklEer vfHk;kstu dks nckus ds fy, iz;qDr ugha dh tkuk pkfg, && U;k;ky; dk fu"d"kZ fd vkosnd ds fo#) izFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ dk jftLVªhdj.k rFkk nkafMd ekeys dk tkjh jguk fof/k dh izfØ;k dk ?kksj nq#i;ksx gS && izFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ rFkk vkxs dh dk;Zokgh vfHk[kafMr djus ds fy, /kkjk 482 ds vèkhu 'kfDr iz;qDr dh tk ldrh gS && O;kid lekt dks izHkkfor djus okys t?kU; vijk/k dh izFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ ek= bl mi/kkj.kk ij vfHk[kafMr ugha dh tk ldrh fd nks"kflf) dh dksbZ laHkkouk ugha gS && vfHkdFkuksa ls] mUgsa lgh eku fy;k tk, rc Hkh] vijkèk ugha curk rks vf/kdkfjrk lkekU;r% iz;qDr dh tk,xh && f'kdk;rdrkZ ds i{kdFku dk leLr laHkkO;rkvksa ds izdk'k esa ;g vo/kkfjr djus ds fy, fo'ys"k.k djuk mfpr ugha fd nks"kflf) dk;e j[kus ;ksX; gksxh ;k ugha && jkT; dk mPpre U;k;ky; gksus ds dkj.k mPp U;k;ky; dks lkekU;r% ogk¡ izFken`"V;k fofu'p; nsus ls fojr jguk pkfg, tgk¡ laiw.kZ rF; viw.kZ rFkk vLi"V gSa && rc vkSj Hkh tc lk{; ladfyr dj U;k;ky; ds le{k is'k ugha fd;k x;k gks rFkk varoZfyr fook|d] pkgs rF;kRed gksa ;k fof/kd] xq#rj gSa vkSj i;kZIr lkexzh ds fcuk lgh ifjizs{; esa ns[ks ugha tk ldrsA , vkb vkj 1964 ,l lh 1] ¼1992½4 ,l lh lh 305] ¼1977½4 ,l lh lh 451] , vkb vkj 1960 ,l lh 866] ¼1976½3 ,l lh lh 736] , vkb vkj 1977 ,l lh 1489] ¼1977½4 ,l lh lh 551] , vkb vkj 1981 ,l lh 1164] , vkb vkj 1983 ,l lh 67] , vkb vkj 1987 ,l lh 877] ¼1988½1 ,l lh lh 692] ¼1992½1 ,l lh lh ¼lIyh-½335] , vkb vkj 2003 ,l lh 1386] ¼2004½6 ,l lh lh 522] ¼2005½1 ,l lh lh 122] ¼2005½13 ,l lh lh 540] , vkb vkj 2007 ,l lh ¼lIyh-½ 231] 2007 , vkb vkj ,l lh MCY;w 4555] 2008 , vkb vkj ,l lh MCY;w 1649] , vkb vkj 2009 ,l lh 2646] ¼2009½7 ,l lh lh 495] , vkb vkj 2010 ,l lh 3762] ¼2010½11 ,l lh lh 226] ¼2013½3 ,l lh lh 330] , vkb vkj 2018 ,l lh 1923 rFkk 2019¼4½ ts ,y ts 85 ¼mPpre U;k-½ vuqlfjrA , vkb vkj 1945 ih lh 18 rFkk , vkb vkj 1945 ih lh 94 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 35
¼2½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 306 rFkk 107 && /kkjk 306 ds v/khu vijkèk xfBr djus ds fy, vfHk;kstui{k dks LFkkfir djuk gksrk gS fd && ¼1½ O;fDr us vkRegR;k dh && ¼2½ vkRegR;k vfHk;qDr us nq"izsfjr dh && /kkjk 306 ds v/khu vijk/k rc gh LFkkfir gksxk tc ßnq"izsj.kÞ gksA ¼iSjk 40
¼3½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 306 lifBr /kkjk 107 && O;fDr ,d vU; O;fDr dks vkRegR;k djus ds fy, mdlkrk gS && ifj.kker%] vU; O;fDr vkRegR;k dj ysrk gS && mdlkus okyk O;fDr vkRegR;k nq"izsfjr djus ds fy, /kkjk 306 ds v/khu nafMr fd, tkus ds nkf;Rok/khu && O;fDr dks fdlh O;fDr dh vkRegR;k nq"izsfjr djus ds fy, nks"kfl) Bgjkus ls iwoZ fl) fd;k tkuk vko';d fd ml O;fDr us vkRegR;k dhA ¼iSjk 41
¼4½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 107 && nq"izsj.k && fdlh O;fDr dks og dk;Z djus ds fy, mdlkuk && vFkok && og dk;Z djus ds fy, ,d ;k vfèkd O;fDr;ksa ds lkFk "kM;a= djuk && vFkok && ÑR; ;k vos/k yksi ls og dk;Z djus esa lgk;rk djuk && tkucw>dj fd;k x;k nqO;Zins'ku ;k ,slk rkfRod rF;k fNikuk ftls izdV djus ds fy, og vkc) gS] ;g Hkh ßnq"izsj.kÞ ds v/khu vk ldrs gSa && vkRegR;k dk vijk/k fd, tkus esa izR;{kr% varoZfyr gksuk vfuok;Z gSA ¼iSjk 42
¼5½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 306@34 rFkk 498d && vfHk;qDr ds ek= i`Fkd~ jgus ds vk/kkj ij fo'okl ugha fd;k tk ldrk fd og vijk/k esa Hkkx ugha ys ldrk FkkA ¼iSjk 69
¼6½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 482 && naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 306@34 rFkk 107 && vfHk;kstu dk vfHk[kaMu && e`rdk 23-4-2018 dks vLirky esa HkrhZ dh xbZ && e`R;qdkfyd dFku rFkk naM izfØ;k lafgrk dh /kkjk 161 ds vèkhu dFku fd fpeuh fxjus ds dkj.k tyh && e`R;qdkfyd dFku ij mfYyf[kr fnukad 22-4-2018 && dFku vijkUg 12%49 cts vkjaHk fd;k x;k tcfd fpfdRlk vf/kdkjh us dFku vfHkys[ku ds i'pkr~ vijkUg 12-49 cts dk le; fy[kk && izFke n`"V~;k izrhr gksrk gS fd fpfdRld us mÙkj&fnukafdr izek.k i= fn;k && lansg l`ftr && fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k foLr`r dFku }kjk gh lek/kku fd;k tk ldrk gS vFkok U;k;ksfpr Bgjk;k tk ldrk gS && izFken`"V~;k ;g dFku izFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ vfHk[kafMr fd, tkus dk vk/kkj ugha cuk;k tk ldrk && lHkh vfHk;qDrxr us e`rdk ij vius ekrk&firk ls /ku e¡xkus dk fujarj ncko cuk;k && le;≤ ij mls ihVk && mlds vkHkw"k.k ugha fn, && vius ÑR;ksa ;k yksiksa ls ;k fujarj vkpj.k ls ,slh ifjfLFkfr;k¡ l`ftr dha fd e`rdk ds ikl vkRegR;k djus ds flok; dksbZ fodYi ugha cpk && -vkxs dk;Zokgh djus ds fy, i;kZIr lkexzh miyCèk && izFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ vfHk[kafMr djus gsrq naM izfØ;k lafgrk dh /kkjk 482 ds v/khu 'kfDr iz;qDr djus ds fy, mi;qDr ekeyk ughaA , vkb vkj 2001 ,l lh 3837] , vkb vkj 2010 ,l lh 1446] , vkb vkj 1994 ,l lh 1418] ¼2010½12 ,l lh lh 190] , vkb vkj 2002 ,l lh 3270] , vkb vkj 2008 ,l lh 3212] , vkb vkj 2009 ,l lh 1828] ¼2010½10 ,l lh lh 353] , vkb vkj 2011 ,l lh 3024] ¼2010½ ,l lh lh 628] ¼2011½3 ,l lh lh 626] ¼2017½1 ,l lh lh 433 rFkk 2019 ,l lh lh vkWuykbu ,l lh 44 vuqlfjrA vkb ,y vkj 2009¼1½ ts ,y ts 236] 1997 ,e ih ,y ts ¼2½ ,l ,u 11] 2000 ,e ih ,y ts ¼2½ ,l ,u 23 rFkk 2000¼4½ ,e ih ,p Vh 277 voyafcrA ¼1994½1 ,l lh lh 73] ¼2009½16 ,l lh lh 605] ¼2012½9 ,l lh lh 734] ¼2010½1 ,l lh lh 750] 1984¼2½ ØkbEl 787 rFkk 1971 ts ,y ts ,l ,u 80 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 67] 71 ,oa 72
ORDER
1. This petition has been filed on 16.8.2018 under section 482 of CrPC for quashing the FIR dated 22.5.2018 registered at Police Station Deonagar District Raisen for the offence punishable under section 306/34 of IPC and also for quashment of Challan No. 169/2018 filed before the trial Court.
2. It is an admitted fact that the deceased Sadhna was marry with the applicant No.1 Digvijay Singh since ten years back. Out of their wedlock one son was also born who is aged about 5 years. On 23.4.2018, the deceased Sadhna was admitted in the Green City Hospital by the applicant No.1 Digvijay Singh and she expired on 29.4.2018, due to the burn injuries. Thereafter, the police received the information and registered the Marg No. 0/2018 on 29.4.2018 at Police Sation, Goutam Nagar, Bhopal. Upon the basis of aforesaid zero number information, original Marg No. 12/1988 was registered at Police Station, Deonagar. After the inquiry into marg on 22.5.2018, Crime No. 136/2018 under section 306/34 of IPC was registered. Police investigate the matter and after investigation challan No. 169/2018 filed before the trial Court.
3. It is submitted by the applicants that the deceased Sadhna was residing with her husband , while Mahendra Singh and Parwati Thakur were living separately since six years back. As per the applicants no case is culled against the applicants under section 306/34 of IPC, even if the entire prosecution story is treated to be a gospel truth. The dying declaration of the deceased was recorded and her statement under section 161 of CrPC was also recorded. In both the statements, no any allegation has been made against the applicants. The deceased herself said in the dying declaration and her statement under section 161 of CrPC that she had gone to the kitchen for cooking the food, but there was no light in the kitchen so she had to light a Chimni which was kept over and almarah near the place where she was working. When she stood up the Chimni fell on her. Due to which her sari caught fire and she got severely burnt. When she scream for help then husband/applicant No.1 reached to the room. The deceased also said in her statement that her mother-in-law and father-in-law/applicants No. 1 and 2 are residing separately and the deceased is resides with her husband and child. The dying declaration have been recorded by the Executive Magistrate. Therefore, no case is made out upon the basis of the dying declaration and statement under section 161 of CrPC.
4. It is submitted by the applicants that registration of FIR and continuance of criminal case against the applicant is a gross abuse of process of law. In the light of various judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court the necessary ingredients of section 107 of IPC are not culled out in the factual matrix of the instant case. The applicants have not played any passive role in the instigating the deceased to commit the suicide. In absence of any prima facie case against the applicants, benefits of doubt ought to have been granted to the applicants. The entire story is based on the inadmissible and concocted evidence. Therefore, this is a fit case for quashment of FIR by exercising the power under section 482 of CrPC. If such criminal prosecution are allowed to stand then it shall lead to travesty of justice. Upon the aforesaid ground, it is prayed that FIR [Annexure A-1] be quashed by using the power under section 482 of CrPC and also to quash the consequent challan in the interest of justice.
5. At the time of oral arguments, learned applicant’s counsel also submitted that the applicants are innocent person who have been falsely implicated in this case. As per documents Page. 72 and 130, the applicants No. 2 and 3 are living separately. The dying declaration at Page 65 and the statement under section 161 of CrPC at page 87 were recorded on 24.4.2018 in which it was stated that the accident was the result of falling the Chimni. No any allegation was made against the applicants. No any visible
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
