Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 676 (RAJ)

Abdul Jabbar v. State of Rajasthan

2015-03-20

M.N.BHANDARI

body2015
JUDGMENT : M.N. Bhandari, J. By this criminal misc. petition, a prayer is made for quashing of FIR bearing No.40/2009 registered with Police Station Manoharpura, District Jaipur. 2. Learned counsel submits that FIR was registered for offence under Section 306 of IPC. On the face of FIR, no offence is made out. It is alleged that after the engagement of deceased girl, relatives of the boy came and asked to accept entire expenses towards engagement, as they did not intend to continue the relation. They did not state any reason. It was asked by the father of deceased girl and then disclosed that girl does not maintain good character, as informed to them. The deceaseds father requested them not to break the engagement on that ground unless it is enquired. The girl thereafter committed suicide that night, though the petitioners or any other accused did not meet her, rather it was a meeting with the deceaseds father only. There exists no element of abetment or instigation so as to commit suicide. They did not inform reason for break of engagement till it was asked. If the girl had committed suicide under emotions, it does not make out an offence under Section 306 of IPC. A prayer is accordingly made to quash the FIR. 3. Learned counsel for the non-petitioner No.2 submits that serious allegations against the deceased girl were made and, that too, on her character, to break the engagement. She had committed suicide as a consequence thereof. The allegation made against the deceased girl constitutes abetment, thus case was rightly registered for offence under Section 306 IPC. 4. A reference of judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Dammu Sreenu v. State of A.P. reported in (2203) 0 Supreme (AP) 25522 has been given. Therein, offence under Section 306 of IPC was found when allegations against maternal uncle of the girl were made, who then committed suicide. The case in hand is covered by the said judgment. 5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. The allegations, as have been made in the FIR need not to be reiterated as have been discussed in the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners. 7. The allegation against the petitioners is to mention about the character of the deceased girl, as was heard by them. 6. The allegations, as have been made in the FIR need not to be reiterated as have been discussed in the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners. 7. The allegation against the petitioners is to mention about the character of the deceased girl, as was heard by them. They came to break the engagement. The girl thereafter committed suicide on the same day. 8. The question is as to whether the aforesaid amounts to abetment so as to make out an offence under Section 306 IPC. 9. It is not a case where girl was directly instigated to commit suicide or any element of abetment exists. The issue of abetment to commit suicide was considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bhagwan Das v. Kartar Singh & Ors. reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3420. Therein, harassment of the wife was caused by the husband and in-laws due to differences and thereupon, wife committed suicide. It was not taken to be a case of abetment. Similar issue was considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M. Mohan v. State Represented by the Dy. Superintendent of Police reported in (2011) 3 SCC 626 . Therein the Hon'ble Apex Court clarified as to what are the required ingredients for abetment of suicide. It was held that abetment involves mental process of instigating. Therein, mens rea to commit offence under Section 306 IPC would be required. The aforesaid should be by a direct or active act of the accused, which led to commit suicide, seeing no other option. The act must be intended to push the victim into a position that he/she commits suicide. 10. If the facts of this case are considered, accused had no direct conversation with the deceased girl, who was earlier engaged to their son. The petitioner party came to make a request to accept the money incurred on engagement ceremony, as they are intending to break the engagement. The reason was not disclosed initially but was on asking by the complainant party. It was based on the information about the character of the deceased girl. If the events are taken into consideration, the element of abetment to commit suicide with mens rea does not exist. If intention would have been (there), then at the first instance itself the facts regarding character of the girl. It was based on the information about the character of the deceased girl. If the events are taken into consideration, the element of abetment to commit suicide with mens rea does not exist. If intention would have been (there), then at the first instance itself the facts regarding character of the girl. It was disclosed only on asking the reason to break the engagement. 11. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and in the light of the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, it cannot be said that on the face of FIR, offence under Section 500 of IPC is disclosed. The view aforesaid is supported by the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2001) 9 SCC 618 . Therein, a suicide note was recovered but after appreciation of the evidence, element of instigation was found missing. The Hon'ble Apex Court elaborately discussed the issue about the instigation to commit suicide. 12. In view of the discussion made above, the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court cannot be accepted. If the somebody refers to character of a person, he does not instigate to commit suicide. At time, suicide is committed when a person is sensitive and emotional but an offence under Section 306 IPC would not be made out in those cases. 13. In view of the discussion made above, the FIR bearing No. 40/2009 registered with Police Station Manoharpura, District Jaipur is quashed, as the ingredients do not disclose commission of offence under Section 306 IPC. 14. This criminal misc. petition is allowed with the aforesaid. This disposes of the stay application, as well. Petition allowed.