IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
G. S. Ahluwalia, J.
Mayank Sharma and others v. State of M. P. and another
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 3107 of 2018 (Gwalior); Decided on 6.12.2018
[Para 25
(2) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss.306 read with S.34 -- M. P. Money-Lenders Act, 1934 -- S.11 -- deceased took money from applicants No. 1 and 3 on assurance of getting them appointed on post of computer operator -- could not fulfill assurance and they could not get appointment -- they were demanding their money back -- one day prior to date of incident, it is alleged that applicants extended threat that they are members of Bajrang Dal -- merely because they belong to an association, would not by itself mean that applicants abetted deceased to commit suicide -- applicants cannot be said to be wrong in demanding their money back -- it cannot be said that applicants No. 1 and 3 had lent money to deceased -- neither offence under section 306, IPC is made out, nor under section 11 of Money-Lenders Act. (2009)16 SCC 605, (2012)9 SCC 734, 2002(2) JLJ 275 (SC) = (2002)5 SCC 371, (2010)I SCC 750, (1994)1 SCC 73, AIR 2011 SC 1238, (2007)10 SCC 797, (2010)1 SCC 707, (2012)9 SCC 460, 2010 AIR SCW 4938 and (2017)1 SCC 433 followed. [Para 28
¼1½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 306 lgifBr 34 rFkk 107 && ,d O;fDr }kjk ,d vU; O;fä dks mdlk;k tkuk rc dgk tk ldrk gS tc og lfØ;rk ls] izR;{k ;k vizR;{k Hkk"kk ds ek/;e ls mls lq>krk gS ;k c<+kok nsrk gS && mdlkuk && vFkZ gS] izsfjr djuk ;k vkxzg djuk ;k fdlh dk;Z dks djus ds fy, izdksfir] míhIr] vkxzg ;k izksRlkfgr djukA ¼2009½ 16 ,l lh lh 605] ¼2012½9 ,l lh lh 734] 2002¼2½ ts ,y ts 275 ¼mPpre U;k-½ ¾ ¼2002½5 ,l lh lh 371] ¼2010½1 ,l lh lh 750] ¼1994½1 ,l lh lh 73] , vkb vkj 2011 ,l lh 1238] ¼2007½10 ,l lh lh 797] ¼2010½1 ,l lh lh 707 rFkk ¼2012½9 ,l lh lh 460 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 25 ¼2½ naM lafgrk] 1860 && /kkjk 306 lgifBr 34 && e-iz- lkgwdkj vfèkfu;e] 1934 && /kkjk 11 && e`rd us vihykFkhZ Ø-1 ,oa 3 dks daI;wVj vkWijsVj ds in ij fu;qä djkus dk vk'oklu ns dj muls /ku fy;k && vk'oklu iwjk ugha dj ldk vkSj mUgsa fu;qfä ugha feyh && og viuk /ku okil ek¡x jgs Fks && ?kVuk ls ,d fnu iwoZ] vfHkdfFkr gS fd vkosndx.k us /kedh nh fd og ctjax ny ds lnL; gSa && ek= blfy, fd og fdlh la?k ds lnL; gSa] ;g vFkZ ugha fudkyk tk ldrk fd vkosndx.k us e`rd dks vkRegR;k djus ds fy, nq"izsfjr fd;k && vkosndx.k }kjk viuk /ku okil ek¡xk tkuk xyr ugha dgk tk ldrk && ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd vkosndx.k Ø-1 ,oa 3 us e`rd dks /ku m/kkj fn;k Fkk && u naM lafgrk dh /kkjk 306] ds v/khu vijk/k curk gS] vkSj u lkgwdkj vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 11 ds v/khuA ¼2009½16 ,l lh lh 605] ¼2012½9 ,l lh lh 734] 2002¼2½ ts ,y ts 275 ¼mPpre U;k-½ ¾ ¼2002½5 ,l lh lh 371] ¼2010½1 ,l lh lh 750] ¼1994½1 ,l lh lh 73] , vkb vkj 2011 ,l lh 1238] ¼2007½ 10 ,l lh lh 797] ¼2010½1 ,l lh lh 707] ¼2012½9 ,l lh lh 460] 2010 , vkb vkj ,l lh MCY;w 4938 rFkk ¼2017½1 ,l lh lh 433 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 28
1. This application under section 482 of CrPC has been filed for quashment of FIR in Crime No. 44/2017 registered at Police Station Dehat Basoda, District Vidisha for offence under sections 306, 34 of IPC and under section 11 of M.P. Money Lending Act.
2. The necessary facts for the disposal of the present application in short are that on 30.1.2017, a Dehati Nalsi was lodged by the complainant Mohd. Adnan to the effect that he is the resident of Makbara Haveli, Ward No.16, Mirjapur, Ganjbasoda and is a contractor by profession. At about 10:00 a.m., when he called his brother Ateeq and sister-in-law Sohlat for having milk, then nobody reacted from the room and when the door of the room was not opened for a considerable long time, then the door was broke open and it was found that the brother Ateeq was hanging whereas the sister-in-law Sohlat was lying on the floor. All the members of the family were called and it was found that his brother Ateeq and his sister-in-law Sohlat had already died. Some papers were lying on the Sofa which has not been read by him.
3. On the basis of Dehati Nalsi, a Merg Enquiry No. 06/17 was registered and the spot inspection was carried out. A suicide note was found from which it appears that one Deepak Khatik had given an amount of Rs.50,000/-. For entering into compromise in the case under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act he was demanding Rs. 3,00,000/-. Similarly it was alleged that one Guddibai Rajput had lodged a false report with regard to misappropriation of Rs. 80,000/- and whereas the applicants were demanding their money back from the deceased which the deceased had taken for getting the applicants No. 1 and 3 appointed in a Government Job.
4. Accordingly, the police registered the offence under section 306, 34 of IPC and under section 11 of M.P. Money Lending Act against the applicants as well as against Deepak Khatik, Guddibai Rajput, Laxminarayan Namdev.
5. It is fairly conceded by the counsel for the applicants that the police has filed the charge sheet. By referring to the dying declaration, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicants that even if the entire allegations made in the dying declaration are accepted, then it is clear that no offence under sections 306, 34 of IPC and under section 11 of M.P. Money Lending Act is made out against the applicants. The police has recorded the statements of the witnesses. Munabbar Ali, the brother of the deceased Ateeq has stated that on 30.1.2017 sometime between 8:00 to 10:00 a.m. his elder brother Mohd. Ateek, initially committed murder of his wife and, therefore, committed suicide by hanging. Allegations were against Deepak Khatik and Guddibai Rajput. It was further alleged that his deceased brother Ateeq had taken money from the applicants No. 1 and 3 for getting them appointed on the post of Computer Operator and this money was taken through one Brijesh Kushwah. The money so collected from the applicants No. 1 and 3 was given to one contractor at Bhopal. However, the applicants No. 1 and 3 could not get the job, due to complaint made on C.M. Helpline and from thereafter the applicants were pressurizing his brother to return the money and because of that he was very disturbed. On 29.1.2017, the applicants came to the house of the deceased and extended a threat that they would come again on the next day and in case if he does not return the money, then he would be killed. Thus, it was alleged that because of the harassment at the hands of the applicants as well as the co-accused Deepak Khatik and Guddibai Rajput, the deceased had committed suicide after killing his wife.
6. A similar statement under section 161 of CrPC was given by Mohd. Yakub, Ajhar Ali and Mohd. Adnan, the brothers of the deceased, Muneeb, the son of the deceased and Rihana Ali, the niece of the deceased had also given the identical statement under section 161 of CrPC.
7. The dying declaration of the deceased also carries the similar allegations against
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.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.