Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 1332 (MP)

RAGHURAJ SINGH v. STATE OF M. P.

2011-11-23

U.C.MAHESHWARI

body2011
JUDGMENT : 1. The applicants/accused have filed this revision under section 397/401 of the Cr.P.C, being aggrieved by the Judgment dated 3-10-2011 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Satna in S.T.No. 124/11 framing the charge against them along with other co-accused for the offence of section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that on 6-7-2009 at about 6.10 O'clock in the morning the information regarding unnatural death of Hiralal Singh was received at Police Station Civil Lines, Satna from the informer Dhiru Singh, according to which, the deceased left his home at about 10 in the night of 5-7-2009 and on 6-7-2009 at 5 O'clock in the morning when his mother went outside to answer the call of nature then she saw said Baba Hira Lal Singh was hanging dead on the tree, on which, the Marg Intimation No. 30/09 was registered at such police station. In its inquiry, the interrogatory statements of Surendra Singh and Nagendra Singh were recorded. Besides this, the dead body panchnama and the spot map was also prepared. In inquiry one suicidal note written by the deceased on the letter-pad of the Gram Panchayat showing the reason for committing suicide was also found on the dead body of said Hira Lal Singh, according to which, Raghuraj Singh and Rishi Kumar Garg, the applicants, subsequent to the election of the deceased as Sarpanch of the village, by giving criminal intimidation and making complaints, used to demand the money from him. Besides this, the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat also withdrew the money by practicing fraud with the deceased and that is why, he is committing the suicide. On the basis of such interrogatory statements and the suicidal note, it was revealed that the applicants and the Secretary of the Panchayat, had abetted the deceased for committing suicide, on which, the Dehati Nalishi No. 0/09 was drawn-up by the Police Officer on 6-7-2009 at about 11 O'Clock in the morning. The same was sent to the Police Station where the original offence was registered at Crime No.285/09 on the same day. In further investigation, the interrogatory statements of Surendra Singh, Nagendra Singh, Kamlesh Singh, Narendra Sing and Dhiru were recorded. The same was sent to the Police Station where the original offence was registered at Crime No.285/09 on the same day. In further investigation, the interrogatory statements of Surendra Singh, Nagendra Singh, Kamlesh Singh, Narendra Sing and Dhiru were recorded. On completion of the investigation, it was established that the applicants and the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat had abetted the deceased Hira Lal Singh for committing the suicide, on which they all were charge-sheeted for the offence of section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. After committing the case to the Sessions Court on evaluation of the charge-sheet, the charge of the aforesaid offence of section 306 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the applicants and other co-accused. They abjured the guilt and thereafter the applicants have come to this court with this revision. 4. Shri Deepak Okhade, counsel for the applicants after taking me through the papers of the charge-sheet placed on the record along with the order dated 18-12-2008 passed by the SDO and the competent authority in Case No. 4/A-89/07-08 along with some inquiry report, the FIR of Crime No. 276/09 registered on dated 3-7-2009 against the deceased and some other five persons including the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat for the offence under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, which are not part of the charge-sheet; and also the impugned order, argued that keeping in view the aforesaid FIR of Crime No.276/09 registered at the same Police Station before two days from the date of committing the suicide by Hira Lal Singh and the aforesaid order of the SDO with the inquiry report if the evidence collected by the investigating agency placed before the Court with the police report under section 173(2) of the Criminal Procedure Codeis taken into consideration as accepted in its entirety even then the ingredients of the alleged offence of section 306 of the Indian Penal Code are not made out against any of the applicants for framing the impugned charge. In continuation, he said that from the averments of the suicidal note or the case diary statements of the abovementioned witnesses, any of the ingredients of section 107 of the Indian Penal Code defining "abetment of thing" are not made out and, in such premises, it could not be inferred even for framing the charge that any of the applicant has abetted the deceased to commit suicide or at their instigation, he proceeded and committed suicide. With these submissions he prayed for discharging the applicants from the aforesaid charge by admitting and allowing this revision. 5. Having heard the counsel at length, keeping in view his argument, I have carefully gone through the papers of the charge-sheet as well as the papers placed on behalf of the applicants with this revision which are not part of the charge-sheet along with the impugned order and the charge framed. 6. It is settled proposition of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of State of Orissa vs. Devendra Nath Padhi, AIR 2005 SC 359 that at the stage of framing the charge only the material placed by the prosecution along with the police report filed under section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code could be considered and taken into consideration. The papers which are not part of the charge-sheet placed by the accused like applicants in their defence, could not be taken into consideration at the stage of framing the charge. In view of such law of land, it is held that the FIR of Crime No.276/09 registered at the same police station on dated 3-7-2009 against the deceased and the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat along with four others for the offence of sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and the order of SDO dated 18-12-2008 along with the inquiry report, could not be taken into consideration at the stage of framing the charge in the case at hand. 7. It is apparent fact on record that immediately after registration of the inquest report, the police went to the place where the dead body of deceased Hira Lal Singh was hanging on a tree in dead position for which the inquest panchnama and the spot map were also prepared. 7. It is apparent fact on record that immediately after registration of the inquest report, the police went to the place where the dead body of deceased Hira Lal Singh was hanging on a tree in dead position for which the inquest panchnama and the spot map were also prepared. In the course of such process, a suicidal note written on the letter pad of the Gram Panchayat, as alleged written by the deceased, was also recovered from the dead body. The same was seized and in further inquiry of the Marg, the interrogatory statements of two persons, namely, Surendra Singh and Nagendra Singh were recorded. On the basis of the suicidal note, it was revealed that the deceased in his life time, subsequent to becoming Sarpanch of the village, was subjected to demand of money with criminal intimidation and complaints to the authorities by the present applicants Raghuraj Singh, Rishi Kumar and one Rudra Pratap Singh. From the averments of the suicidal note, prima facie it is made out that the deceased was subjected to offence of extortion, by the applicants and said Rudhra Pratap Singh because by creating fear and making demand of money without any sufficient cause, the deceased was extorted by them. Accordingly, prima facie, it could be said that the applicants by their criminal activities created the atmosphere against the deceased, on which, the deceased was instigated to commit suicide and committed the same. 8. True it is that as per further averments of the suicidal note, the deceased also committed suicide because his Secretary of the Gram Panchayat was used to withdraw the money after taking his signature on the cheque by practicing fraud for which the criminal case was also registered against the deceased including the Secretary and other persons as stated above. The averments of the suicidal note are further supported by the interrogatory statements of Surendra Singh, Nagendra Singh, Kamlesh Singh, Narendra Singh and Dhiru Singh. 9. Undisputedly, the word "abetment" mentioned in section 306 of the Indian Penal Code has not been separately defined under such section so, as per practice and settled proposition, for the purpose of its interpretation, section 107 of the Indian Penal Code defining the words "the abetment of thing" is always taken into consideration. 9. Undisputedly, the word "abetment" mentioned in section 306 of the Indian Penal Code has not been separately defined under such section so, as per practice and settled proposition, for the purpose of its interpretation, section 107 of the Indian Penal Code defining the words "the abetment of thing" is always taken into consideration. In section 107 of the Indian Penal Code to define "the abetment of a thing" following three material ingredients have been stated. The ingredients are; A person abets the doing of a thing, who (a) instigates any person to do that thing or, (b) Engages with one or more person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy and in order to the doing of that thing, or (c) intentionally criminal aids by any act or illegal omission the doing of that thing. Out of the aforesaid if any of the ingredients is found in the matter then it could be said that such thing was abetted by the person. Keeping in view the aforesaid ingredients of section 107 of the Indian Penal Code on examining the case at hand, then from the available evidence in the charge-sheet, as per the aforesaid discussion, prima facie it is established that prior to committing suicide by Hira Lal Singh, on account of illegal demand of money was subjected to extortion with criminal intimidation, complaints to the various authorities by the applicants and, due to such activities of the applicants Hira Lal Singh, after writing the suicidal note mentioning all the aforesaid things, proceeded to commit suicide and committed the same by hanging himself on a tree. So, in such premises, there is a prima facie evidence in the charge-sheet showing the deceased was instigated and abetted by the applicants to commit suicide. 10. It is also settled proposition of the law that whenever on evaluation of the charge-sheet even if slight prima facie evidence with respect of the alleged offence is found against the accused like the applicants then there is no option with the Court except to frame the charge of such section against the accused like the applicants. 10. It is also settled proposition of the law that whenever on evaluation of the charge-sheet even if slight prima facie evidence with respect of the alleged offence is found against the accused like the applicants then there is no option with the Court except to frame the charge of such section against the accused like the applicants. It is needless to state here that at the stage of framing the charge, the court has not to consider the question whether on framing the charge and holding the trial the accused like applicants could be convicted in the matter or not. 11. It also appears from the charge-sheet that besides the aforesaid instigation of the applicants and said Rudra Pratap Singh, the deceased also proceeded to commit suicide because of some instigation given by the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat by practicing fraud with him. But the present revision has not been preferred by said Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, therefore, I do not find fit to consider such aspect in the present matter at this stage. 12. In view of the aforesaid, I have not found any perversity, infirmity, illegality or anything against the propriety of the law in the order impugned, framing the aforesaid alleged charge of section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the applicants, requiring any interference under the revisional jurisdiction of this Court, hence this revision being devoid of any merit is hereby dismissed at the stage of motion hearing.