Advocates:
['S S NANDA', 'SR A A G', 'SABIL MIRZA', '', 'S S AHMED', 'RAHUL RAINA']

CRR No.27/2009 Page 1 of 9

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU

CRR No. 27/2009

Date of order: 22.11.2018

State of J&K

Vs.

Ajit Singh and another

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Judge.

Appearing counsel:

For Petitioner (s)

:

Mr. C. M. Koul, Sr. AAG.

For Respondent (s) :

Mr. Rahul Raina, Advocate.

i)

Whether to be reported in

Digest/Journal

:

Yes/No.

ii)

Whether approved for reporting

in Press/Media

:

Yes/No.

1.

This criminal revision petition has been filed by the State against the

order dated 19.01.2009 passed by the 1^st Additional Sessions Judge,

Jammu by virtue of which the respondents herein have been

discharged for the offences under Sections 306/406 RPC.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that one Naveen Kumar Honda and

Mst. Anu Bala came from Batala, Punjab and stayed at Broadway

Hotel at Jammu in one room. On 19.07.2007 both of them consumed

poisonous substance aluminum phosphide in the hotel room and

committed suicide. The alleged suicide committed by these persons is

attributed to the respondents, who hail from Batala and Amritsar

respectively. The two suicide notes were recovered from the hotel

room where the suicide was committed by the victims. These two

suicide notes coupled with the statements of the witnesses are the

mainstay of the prosecution case for implicating the accused under

Sections 306/406 RPC. It has been projected in the challan that the

business transaction between the accused and the victim-Naveen

Kumar Honda and the harassment caused to the victim Mst. Anu

CRR No.27/2009 Page 2 of 9

Bala by the accused Suman Mohan Bazaz led to the suicide of the

victims.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-State submits that the financial

harassment caused by the accused to the victim Naveen Kumar

Honda forced them to commit suicide in the hotel room. The suicide

notes were recovered from the place of occurrence, prima facie, a

case is made out that the accused are responsible for the suicide of

the victims and are liable to be charged for offences under Sections

306/406 RPC.

4.

The petitioner-State has challenged the impugned order dated

19.01.2009 on the following grounds: -

(a)The order suffers from material illegality and irregularity in

the manner that the Court at stage of framing of charges has

appreciated the evidence collected during the investigation. The

weight and relevance of suicide notes have been scrutinized. The

respondents are named in the suicide notes as persons

responsible to create the situation. There is enough material

connecting the respondents to the commission of offences and

sufficient to frame the charges. The Government has sanctioned

the filing of the Criminal Revision vide No. 726-LD(ACQ) of

2009 dated 06.04.2009.

5.

I have carefully gone through the grounds taken in the memo of revision

petition and gave patient hearing to rival contentions.

6.

In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, it may be noted

that sections 268 and 269 of Cr.P.C. relate to the trial of cases before

the Court of Sessions. It is to be seen whether prima facie case has

been made out for framing charge or not. It is apt to quote sections

268 and 269 of Cr.P.C. as under:-

“268 Discharges:

If upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents

submitted therewith, and after hearing the submissions of the accused

and the prosecution in this behalf, the judge considers that there is no

CRR No.27/2009