Supreme Court of India
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. JAIN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU
Chitresh Kumar Chopra
Versus
State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1473 OF 2009 ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 1827 OF 2007
Decided On : 10-08-2009
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 306/34 and 107 - Abetment of suicide - Suicide abetted by business partners - conduct of appellant and his accomplices was such that deceased was left with no other option except to end his life - responsibility of suicide attributed to appellant in suicide note left by deceased - statements recorded by police during course of investigations, tend to show that on account of business transactions with accused, including appellant deceased was put under tremendous pressure to do something which he was perhaps not willing to do - Clause firstly of Section 107 attracted - Trial Court correctly came to the conclusion that case for framing charge against appellant had been made out - High Court rightly dismissed revision petition - appeal dismissed. (Paras 17 to 21)
(1975)3 SCC 495; (1990)4 SCC 76; (1996)4 SCC 659; (1997)4 SCC 393; (2001)9 SCC 618 - Relied upon.
Judgment :-
D.K. Jain, J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal by special leave is directed against final judgment and order dated 1st February, 2007 rendered by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Revision Petition No. 62 of 2004. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has dismissed the Revision Petition filed by the appellant herein under Section 397 read with Sections 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Code"), upholding the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, dated 8th January, 2004, framing charge against the appellant for commission of offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the IPC") arising out of FIR No. 329 of 2002 dated 4th July, 2002 registered at Police Station Mehrauli.
3. On 4th July, 2002, one Rahul Kaushik lodged the said First Information Report (FIR) with Police Station, Mehrauli stating that his father Jitendra Sharma (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") had committed suicide on 3rd July, 2002 by shooting himself with his licensed revolver. It was alleged that the deceased was a partner with the appellant in this appeal along with two other persons viz., Jahuruddin and Mahavir Prasad and they were all engaged in the real estate business; he committed suicide on account of the problems created by these three persons; the deceased left behind a suicide note which mentioned that there were some money transactions between them and thus, these three persons had abetted the deceased to commit suicide. For the sake of ready reference, relevant portion of the suicide note is extracted below:
"The money of Shri Bansi Dhar and Shri Grewal is with Ram Pashre. The money of Shri Puri and Rajendra has been given to Ramjan, Mehrauli by Jahur and Jahur has become dishonest. The money of B.C. Malik and K.S. Yadav is with Mahesh, who has written the same and given. The rest, the ex-SDE, Pamer Singh and had taken and did not do Puris work.
My children known nothing about this matter. C.K. Chopras money has been given by Jahur, Jahur and Chopra are saying things against me and are thereby troubling me. Kartar etc., money was taken by Jahur and Mahavir. They had taken it. The reason for the scandal are Chopra and his friends. They are troubling me and are pressurizing me to write all this. I am stressed and therefore, going away."
4. On completion of investigation, the police filed charge-sheet against the said three persons including the appellant for allegedly committing offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the IPC. As per the charge-sheet, the case of the prosecution in short is that there appeared to be a dispute between the deceased and the appellant regarding share of profits from the sale of the lands; prior to the incident, the deceased was asked to sign a settlement paper, according to which, the share of the deceased was reduced from 25% to 10% in favour of one Tegh Singh Chabbra and the appellant, who were otherwise having 45% share each in the profits from sale proceeds of lands and that due to this dispute, the deceased was mentally harassed and pressurized by the appellant and the other two accused, as a result whereof, the deceased committed suicide.
5. On being charge-sheeted, all the three accused were put up for trial before the court of the Additional Sessions Judge. The trial court felt satisfied that there was sufficient material on record for framing of charge against all the three accused. Accordingly, on
8th January, 2004, the following charge was framed:
".... That you all on 3.7.2002 at about 3.10 p.m. at house No. 108, village Saidulajake, New Delhi in furtherance of common intention, mentally tortured Jitender Sharma and abetted him to commit suicide by your said act of mental torture and thus you thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC and within cognizance of this Court. ...."
6. Aggrieved by the framing of the charge
Shri Ram Vs. The State of U.P. (1975) 3 SCC 495
State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs. Som Nath Thapa & Ors. (1996) 4 SCC 659
State of Maharashtra Vs. Priya Sharan Maharaj (1997) 4 SCC 393
Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi & Ors. Vs. Jitendra Bhimraj Bijja & Ors (1990) 4 SCC 76
Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 SCC 618
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.