Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1196 (RAJ)

Kaushik @ Komal Acharya v. State Of Rajasthan

2021-07-23

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2021
JUDGMENT 1. The instant revision has been preferred by the petitioner herein for assailing the order dated 07.01.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Woman Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.12/2020, whereby the learned trial court, directed framing of charge against the petitioner herein for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. 2. No one has appeared to oppose this revision on behalf of the respondent No.2-complainant despite service of notice. 3. Briefly stated, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the revision are noted hereinbelow. 4. The respondent No.2 Chhagan Lal submitted a written report to the SHO, Police Station Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur on 02.04.2019 alleging inter alia that in the previous night, 3-4 miscreants came to his house and threatened his daughter and family members that if Guddi (deceased) was not betrothed to Komal (the petitioner herein), and was married off somewhere else, then the entire family of the complainant would be destroyed. The complainant alleged that his daughter Guddi's marriage was scheduled to be solemnized on 16.04.2019. He and his wife had gone to Basni for making preparations. About 09.00- 09.15 p.m. he received a call from his home informing that Guddi had bolted the door from inside and after 3-4 persons had come there and had given threats. The complainant reached home in 15-20 minutes. The neighbours also came there. The door was broken down and his daughter was taken to the MDM Hospital, Jodhpur, where doctors declared her dead. He alleged that the miscreants were threatening his family members. He had personally met Komal's parents and had requested them to refrain their son, but rather than paying heed to the complainant's pleas, Komal's parents threatened that if he married his daughter somewhere else, consequences would be severe. The complainant further alleged that he had not disclosed the schedule of his daughter's marriage, which was to take place on 16.04.2019, even to his family members fearing that the miscreants would malign his image in the society and could jeopardize the marriage. He further alleged that Komal and his family members, to be specific, his brother-in-law, had instigated his daughter to commit suicide. 5. On the basis of this report FIR No.183/2019 came to be registered at the Police Station Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur for the offence under Section 306 IPC. He further alleged that Komal and his family members, to be specific, his brother-in-law, had instigated his daughter to commit suicide. 5. On the basis of this report FIR No.183/2019 came to be registered at the Police Station Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur for the offence under Section 306 IPC. During the course of investigation, autopsy was carried out on the body of the victim Guddi at the MDM, Hospital, Jodhpur and the medical board opined that the cause of death of the girl was antemortem hanging. 6. The Investigating Officer recorded statement of one Dhanraj Soni, who stated that the complainant and his family members used to reside in a rented portion of his (Dhanraj's) house at Acharya Colony, Chandna Bhakhar, Jodhpur. On 01.04.2019, he (Dhanraj) was strolling in the park outside his house. At about 09.30 p.m., four persons came there and asked for Chhagan Lal and then they told him that something untoward had happened in the house of Chhagan Lal. However, Dhanraj did not identify these persons. 7. Guddi's brother Prem Prakash stated that he and his two sisters were at home on the fateful night. His parents had gone out to do shopping for the marriage. Four boys came around and asked Guddi about their parents. She feigned ignorance, on which these boys stated that they would forcibly abduct her and marry her to a boy named Komal, on which, his sister went inside the house and the four boys also went away. On the same night, Guddi ended her life by hanging herself. 8. Deepu, sister of the deceased, stated that cards of her sister Guddi's marriage had been printed and the marriage was scheduled to be solemnized on 16.04.2019. On 01.04.2019, their parents had gone to Basni to make purchases for the wedding. She, her brother and sister were standing outside the house. At about 09.00 p.m., four boys came there and told Guddi that she would have to marry Komal and threatened her. Guddi immediately threw her mobile phone into the gutter and went to her room and locked the door from inside. They tried to make her open the door, but she did not respond, on which, the neighbours were called. They also called their parents. The door was broken open and Guddi was seen hanging inside. She alleged that the threat given by four unknown boys led Guddi to commit suicide. 9. They tried to make her open the door, but she did not respond, on which, the neighbours were called. They also called their parents. The door was broken open and Guddi was seen hanging inside. She alleged that the threat given by four unknown boys led Guddi to commit suicide. 9. Witness Shravan Acharya stated that he used to live opposite to Chhagan Lal's house. It was common knowledge in the neighbourhood that Guddi was involved in a love affair with Komal. Guddi's family members had tried to break up the relationship. Komal's father Shanti Lal sent Komal to live at his uncle's house at Shikargarh so that the boy and girl could be separated. Guddi's marriage was fixed to someone else and was scheduled to be solemnized on 16.04.2021. On 31.03.2021, ceremony of 'Dastoor' was performed. He (the witness) saw no one from the family of Shanti Lal (Komal's father) coming to the house of Chhagan Lal on the day of the incident. Guddi was perturbed by the marriage against her choice and thus, she ended her life by hanging. 10. Hari Singh stated that Komal used to work with him in the handicraft factory. Komal used to take his phone for taking to someone. On a couple of occasions, a girl called on his phone and requested to talk to Komal. On this, the witness realized that Komal and Guddi were involved in a love affair with each other. Komal was sent to live at a distant place so as to break up the relationship. 11. None of the witnesses examined by the Investigating Officer during investigation could fortify the allegation of the complainant that the petitioner instigated Guddi or was in any manner responsible for her suicide. Four boys, who had allegedly come to the house of the complainant and had given the threats were not identified. The call details of the mobile phones alleged to be of Guddi and the petitioner were collected and upon analysis thereof, the Investigating Officer concluded that on the day of the incident also, the deceased and the petitioner talked to each other for long duration. Basing the conclusion of investigation on this call detail report, the Investigating Officer held the petitioner responsible for the suicide of Guddi and accordingly, a charge sheet was filed against him for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. 12. Basing the conclusion of investigation on this call detail report, the Investigating Officer held the petitioner responsible for the suicide of Guddi and accordingly, a charge sheet was filed against him for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. 12. The learned trial court proceeded to frame charge against the petitioner for this very offence by the order dated 07.01.2021, which is assailed in this revision filed under Section 397 CrPC. 13. Learned counsel Mr. N.K. Bohara, representing the petitioner, vehemently and fervently urged that there is no material on record on the basis whereof the petitioner could have been charged for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. The Investigating Officer recorded statements of numerous witnesses during investigation, who stated that the petitioner and Guddi were involved in a love affair with each other. Guddi's father had engaged her with some other boy and the marriage was scheduled to be solemnized on 16.04.2019. As per Mr. Bohra, the girl was seriously perturbed by her betrothal to a man not of her choice and as a consequence, she ended her life by hanging herself in her father's house. Mr. Bohra submitted that by no stretch of imagination can the petitioner be held responsible for the suicide of Guddi and hence, he implored the court to accept the revision and set aside the impugned order. 14. Learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel. He urged that the Investigating Officer could not identify the boys, who had come to the house of the complainant on the fateful night and had allegedly threatened the available family members with dire consequences because Guddi was being married off to some other boy. Nevertheless, it was contended by the Prosecutor that there is ample material on record, which shows that the petitioner was harrounding the victim to marry him. Repeated calls were put by the petitioner to Guddi in an attempt to force her to marry, but she did not succumb to the undue advances of the petitioner. She was apparently faced with a situation, wherein her image in the society was being seriously tarnished because of the petitioner's conduct and thus, she took the extreme step of ending her life in order to protect her own and her family's reputation. She was apparently faced with a situation, wherein her image in the society was being seriously tarnished because of the petitioner's conduct and thus, she took the extreme step of ending her life in order to protect her own and her family's reputation. Learned Public Prosecutor, thus, urged that it is not a fit case warranting exercise of this court's revisional powers so as to interfere in the impugned order whereby charge was framed against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. On these submissions, the learned Public Prosecutor sought dismissal of the revision. 15. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the material available on record. Suffice it to say that the family members of the deceased totally refuted the theory regarding the alleged love affair between her and the petitioner, but the other independent witnesses examined by the Investigating Officer during investigation fortify this fact in their statements. The call detail records collected by the Investigating Officer establish that the deceased and the accused used to talk to each other on mobile. Serious efforts were made by the family members of the deceased to break up her love affair with the petitioner, but failed and the relations were continuing undeterred. The family members tried to hide this fact in the FIR as well as in the statements given to the Investigating Officer, but it is categoric conclusion of the Investigating Officer regarding an active love affair between the petitioner and the deceased Guddi. The complainant and his family members namely, Smt. Sugan Devi, Prem Prakash and Deepu, set up a theory in their statements that on the fateful night, four unknown boys came to their house and threatened that if Guddi was not married to Komal, the family would face dire consequences. However, apparently, this theory is totally conjectural because the Investigating Officer made no efforts whatsoever to verify the same or to establish the identity of the boys. There is no finding in the charge-sheet as to whether any such incident actually took place. However, apparently, this theory is totally conjectural because the Investigating Officer made no efforts whatsoever to verify the same or to establish the identity of the boys. There is no finding in the charge-sheet as to whether any such incident actually took place. Rather, the investigating officer based his finding regarding the accused petitioner being responsible for the suicide of Guddi merely on the basis of the fact that call details of the mobile phones allegedly in use of the deceased and the accused indicated exchange of prolonged conversations between them right up to the date of incident. It may be stated that no evidence whatsoever was collected by the Investigating Officer to fix the ownership of the SIM numbers in question. Even assuming that such calls were made, no inference can be drawn that the accused instigated Guddi to commit suicide. In all probability, Guddi was not agreeable with her betrothal to a man other than Komal and the marriage had been fixed on the insistence of her family members. The marriage was fixed on 16.04.2019. On the day before the incident, some ceremony was performed. Manifestly, the deceased became perturbed thereby and finding no way out to achieve her desired relationship with the petitioner, she took the extreme step of ending her own life. There is no reliable prima facie material/evidence on the entire record, which could satisfy the court that the petitioner herein in any manner instigated or abetted Guddi to end her life. In absence of any such prima facie material, the order framing charge cannot be sustained. 16. As a consequence, the impugned order dated 07.01.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Woman Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur in Sessions Judge No.12/2020 is quashed and the accused-petitioner is discharged from the charge for the offence punishable under section 306 IPC. The revision is allowed, accordingly.