THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3567 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner-accused in P.R.C.No.118 of 2024 on the file of the learned IV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate - cum - IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, L.B. Nagar, registered for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 20.02.2023 respondent No.2/ de facto complainant lodged a report before the Police stating that on 16.12.2022, she received a death message from the loco pilot of train No.12776 reporting that an unknown male, aged approximately 40 years, had been run over by the train at KM No.199/4-6 near LC Gate No.6, Moula Ali Station, and that the body was lying between the down line tracks. Based on this information, a case was registered under Crime No. 504 of 2022 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. at RPS Secunderabad by Sri M. SukdevNayak, RHC-55/SC, and the investigation was entrusted to one Sri DevidRaju, RHC-583. During the investigation, the deceased was identified as Sri JorepallyBhaskar Reddy. A suicide note was found in the purse of the deceased stating that he had taken a hand loan of Rs.1,00,000/- from one Karri Satyanarayana on 05.09.2020, and that the said person was maliciously demanding Rs.6,00,000/-. Unable to bear the harassment and torture, the deceased decided to end his life. Based on this evidence, the section of law was altered from 174 Cr.P.C., to 306 of IPC, and the CD file was transferred to PS Chaitanyapuri, Rachakonda, on point of jurisdiction. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner/accused filed the present criminal petition.

3. Heard Sri R. Gopi Mohan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 - State. Though notice served upon respondent No.2, none appeared on her behalf.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the materials relied upon by the prosecution are wholly insufficient to make out a prima facie case under Section 306 IPC, and continuation of proceedings against the petitioner amounts to an abuse of process of law. He further submitted that the complaint, charge sheet, and witness statements do not reveal any instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid on the part of the petitioner in abetting the alleged suicide of the deceased. The charge sheet lacks evidence of mensrea or any direct or indirect act that could have compelled the deceased to take the extreme step. The suicide note itself remains unverified, as the Forensic Science Laboratory was unable to conclude that the handwriting was that of the deceased, owing to the failure of the family to provide sufficient specimen writings.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the 161 Cr.P.C. statements of key witnesses also do not attribute any harassment or abetment by the petitioner and that the statement of the loco pilot casts serious doubt over the cause of death, as he categorically stated that the deceased lay on the railway track and was not run over by the train under his control. He further contended that the re-registration of the case under Section 306 IPC by the Chaitanyapuri Police was erroneous in view of the fact that the incident occurred at Moula Ali within a different jurisdiction. Therefore, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that the deceased, who was engaged in real estate business and had two daughters, borrowed Rs.1,00,000/- from the accused in the year 2020 and that the accused began harassing the deceased to repay Rs.6,00,000/- instead of the actual loan amount. On 16.12.2022, the deceased left his residence stating that he was going to repay the d