Bangalore District Court
R.T. Nagara P.S vs A1 Mohammad Rafi on 16 January, 2024
KABC010073552017
IN THE COURT OF XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-46)
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
PRESENT:
Sri Manjunatha, B.A., LL.B.,
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
SC No.374/2017
BETWEEN
Complainant State by RT Nagar P.S.,
(Rep. by Learned Public
Prosecutor)
AND
Accused 1.Mohammed Rafi
S/o H. A. Ghaffar Khan,
a/a 55 Yrs.,
2.Mrs., Feroze Jabeen
C/o Mohammed Rafi,
a/a 54 Yrs.,
Both are R/a No.75, I Floor, I Main
Road, Ganganagar Extension,
RT Nagar Post,
Bengaluru-560 032.
(By Sri/Smt: PC, Adv.,)
*****
2 SC No.374/2017
Date of offence & time 16.10.2016
Date of report of offence 21.10.2016
Date of arrest of the -
accused
Date of release on bail -
Total period of custody -
Name of the Sri Sunil
complainant
Date of commencement 22.12.2022
of recording of evidence
Date of closing of 12.09.2023
evidence
Offence complained of U/s.306 r/w Sec.34 of IPC.
Opinion of the Judge Accused found not guilty
JUDGMENT
The Police Inspector of RT Nagar Police Station, Bangalore, has submitted charge sheet against the accused No.1 and 2 for the offence punishable U/s.306 r/w Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code in their Crime No.273/2016.
2. The factual matrix of the prosecution case are as under:
Since two years the deceased-Smt. Parvathi was working as care taker of father of accused No.2 by name Mohammed Bashir, and residing with them. The accused No.1 and 2 had been to pilgrimage along with their family. And left the said Mohammed Bashir in their relatives house at Kanakanagar during the said period and deceased was also residing in the house of relatives of the accused. The accused 3 SC No.374/2017 No.1 and 2 returned to the house after completion of their pilgrimage, and noticed theft of gold taken place in their house bearing No.75, I Floor, situated at I Main Road, Ganganagar, within the limits of RT Nagar P.S., Bangalore and alleging that the deceased-Smt. Parvathi had committed theft in their house. By feeling hurt and disgusting on 16.10.2016 at 3.00 a.m deceased-Smt. Parvathi committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her and lit fire and died in the Victoria Hospital on 21.10.2016 at 4.00 a.m. The accused herein by subjecting the deceased-Smt.Parvathi to mental cruelty by making false allegations, and abetted her to commit suicide and thereby the accused No.1 and 2 have committed the offence as alleged against them.
3.The RT Nagar Police have submitted charge sheet against the accused before the jurisdictional LVI Addl., CMM., Bangalore. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and committed the case to the Sessions Court by complying Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. after furnishing charge sheet copy to the accused. The same was numbered as SC No.374/2017.
4.The charge was framed against the accused No.1 and 2 on 28.07.2022 for the offence punishable U/s.306 r/w Sec.34 IPC as alleged against them. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried.
4 SC No.374/20175.The prosecution has examined in all 7 witnesses as PW.1 to PW.7 and got marked documents at Ex.P1 to P7 and identifies MO1 to 3. The learned Public Prosecutor has given up the witnesses CW.10 to Cw.12, CW.16, CW.17 and CW.20 to CW.23. In spite of sufficient opportunities provided to the prosecution the witnesses cited as CW.6, CW.7, CW.9 CW.14, CW.15, and CW.24 have not been examined by the prosecution due to failure of concerned police to secure the said witness and keep present before the Court for the purpose of evidence. So the evidence of prosecution was taken as closed with an opportunity to examine the said witnesses CW.6, Cw.7, CW.9 CW.14, CW.15, and CW.24, if the said witness were secured and produced by the concerned police before the Court for examination before conclusion of the trial.
6.After completion of prosecution side evidence, this Court has recorded the statement of accused No.1 and 2 on 22.11.2023 as provided U/s.313 of Cr.P.C. The accused No.1 and 2 have denied incriminating evidence present against them, nor chosen to lead defense evidence in support of their case.
7.Heard the arguments on both sides and perused the materials on record.
8.The following points that arises for consideration of this court:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused with common 5 SC No.374/2017 intention had given complaint stating that the gold articles were found missing in their house bearing No.75, I Floor, I Main Road, Ganganagar, Bangalore, when they returned from the pilgrimage, and while lodging the complaint by suspecting the deceased, who is the maid and based on the said complaint case was registered against the deceased-Smt. Parvathi, unable to tolerate the allegations made by accused herein against her with regard to theft in their house, by feeling hurt and disgusting deceased-Smt. Parvathi committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her and lit fire and died in the Victoria Hospital on 21.10.2016 at 3.00 a.m. and accused No.1 and 2 abetted her to commit suicide, and thereby committed the offence of abetment punishable U/s.306 r/w Sec.34 of IPC?
2. What order?
10.This Court findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Negative Point No.2: As per final order for the following:-
REASONS
11.Point No.1: On perusal of the complaint and also charge sheet and the evidence of witnesses produced by the prosecution clearly goes to show that since two years the 6 SC No.374/2017 deceased-Smt. Parvathi was working as care taker of father of accused No.2 by name Mohammed Bashir, and residing with them. The accused No.1 and 2 had been to pilgrimage along with their family. And left the said Mohammed Bashir in their relatives house at Kanakanagar during the said period and deceased was also residing in the house of relatives of the accused. The accused No.1 and 2 returned to the house after completion of their pilgrimage, and noticed theft of gold taken place in their house bearing No.75, I Floor, situated at I Main Road, Ganganagar, within the limits of RT Nagar P.S., Bangalore and alleging that the deceased-Smt. Parvathi had committed theft in their house. By feeling hurt and disgusting on 16.10.2016 at 3.00 a.m deceased-Smt. Parvathi committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her and lit fire and died in the Victoria Hospital on 21.10.2016 at 4.00 a.m. The accused herein by subjecting the deceased-Smt.Parvathi to mental cruelty by making false allegations, and abetted her to commit suicide and thereby the accused No.1 and 2 have committed the offence as alleged against them.
12.In order to prove the said allegation regarding mental harassment and abetment to commit suicide of deceased-Smt. Parvathi, the prosecution has examined PW.1, PW.1 Sunil being the relative of the deceased-Smt. Parvathi and informant deposed that deceased-Smt. Parvathi joined as maid through some agency in the house of accused herein. 2-3 years before 7 SC No.374/2017 her death when the accused herein went to pilgrimage, the deceased was looking after the elders of the accused family members in the house of relatives of the accused herein. The house of the accused was locked when they went to pilgrimage.
The accused herein returned from Pilgrimage and found that the theft of gold ornaments has taken place in their house. The accused herein filed a complaint to RT Nagar police, and the RT Nagar police subjected the deceased for enquiry in view of theft case registered based on the complaint filed by the accused herein. The deceased-Smt. Parvathi was subjected to enquiry by the RT Nagar Police. The deceased-Smt. Parvathi feeling hurt and disgusting with the police enquiry poured kerosene on her and lit fire, and thereby attempted to commit suicide and admitted to Victoria Hospital, Bangalore for treatment. The accused No.1 telephoned to PW.1, and informed regarding the incident took place and he rushed to the Hospital and found that the deceased-Smt. Parvathi was in a semiconscious stage. He filed a complaint marked as Ex.P1. He further deposed that he does not know the contents of Ex.P1 complaint filed by him before the RT Nagar Police. He did not speak to the deceased-Smt. Parvathi soon before her death. He does not know the telephone number of deceased. He did not meet the deceased-Parvathi before the incident. However, he was speaking to her through phone. Whatever he deposed before the Court in his examination in chief is not 8 SC No.374/2017 mentioned in Ex.P1 complaint. In fact deceased-Smt. Parvathi married to a person by name Shivu. But she was residing separately. He denies another theft case registered against the deceased-Smt. Parvathi in RT Nagar P.S., When the accused No.1 filed complaint before the RT Nagar Police regarding theft taken in his house is not known to him. Alleged offence of abetment committed by accused herein is denied by the learned counsel for the accused.
13.PW.2 Smt. Bharathamma being the sister of deceased-Smt. Parvathi deposed that the deceased-Smt. Parvathi was maid in the house of accused persons. Once the accused herein went to pilgrimage the deceased-Smt. Parvathi looking after the elder members of the accused family in the house of relative of the accused persons. Theft has taken place in the house of accused herein when they went to pilgrimage. After returning from the pilgrimage the accused here in enquire deceased-Smt. Parvathi and suspected her. The deceased had told the same to PW.2 through phone. The deceased was disgusted due to registration of theft case in RT Nagar Police and committed suicide by pouring kerosene and lit fire on her. She rushed to the Hospital and saw the deceased. The deceased was working with the accused persons as maid since 2-3 years before her death. She did not meet the deceased before the incident took place. The deceased was able to speak when she was under treatment in Victoria Hospital. The 9 SC No.374/2017 deceased had married one Amarnath relative of PW.2s' husband. She denies theft case registered against deceased- Smt. Parvathi in RT Nagar P.S., even before theft taken place in the house of accused herein. The accused herein might have filed complaint by suspecting the deceased.
14.PW.3 Deepa another relative of deceased-Smt. Parvathi deposed that after death of husband of the deceased, the deceased was working in garments at Bangalore, thereafter she joined as maid to look after the elder members of the family of the accused herein. The deceased committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her and lit fire and she was admitted to Victoria Hospital, for treatment. She rushed to the Hospital and enquire the deceased, as to why she has attempted to commit suicide. The deceased-Smt. Parvathi told her that the accused persons suspected her and filed complaint for the theft taken place in their house.
15.PW.4 Manjula another relative of the deceased-Smt. Parvathi deposed regarding employee and employer relationship between the accused herein and the deceased soon before her death. When the accused persons went to Pilgrimage, the deceased-Smt. Parvathi was looking after the elder members of the accused family, in the relatives of the accused herein. Theft had taken place in the house of the accused No.1 and 2, when they went to Pilgrimage, a complaint was registered in RT Nagar Police and the RT Nagar Police, 10 SC No.374/2017 subjected the deceased for enquiry in the theft case registered based on the complaint filed by the accused herein. Deceased- Smt. Parvathi committed suicide by pouring kerosene on her and lit fire due to enquiry conducted by the concerned police in view of theft taken place in the house of accused herein. Later deceased-Smt. Parvathi died in the Hospital. She came to know about the incident took place on the next day morning and she rushed to the hospital to see the deceased-Smt. Parvathi. She gave statement ot the police in this regard.
16.PW.5 Mubarak Khan being the spot mahazar witness deposed regarding drawing of Ex.P5 mahazar, seizure of MO1 plastic kerosene bottle, MO2 match box and MO3 partly burnt clothes. PW.6 R.N. Kondappa, Head Constable, RT Nagar P.S., visited the Victoria Hospital on 16.10.2016 to record the statement of the deceased-Smt. Parvathi. But the Medical Officer advised him that deceased-Smt. Parvathi is not able to give her statement. Therefore her statement was not recorded by him, and Ex.P6 report was submitted to the I.O.,
17.PW.7 Anil.M, the Special Tahsildar, Bangalore North, visited the Hospital on 18.10.2016 on request of RT Nagar Police to record the statement of the deceased-Smt. Parvathi. On the same day at about 6.15 p.m. he has recorded the statement of the deceased. The deceased told him that on 16.10.2016 at 3.00 a.m. she poured kerosene on her and lit fire to commit suicide, as deceased had been subjected to enquiry 11 SC No.374/2017 due to theft taken place in the house of accused herein when they went to pilgrimage. Ex.P7 is the statement given by the deceased. Before recording the statement case sheet of the deceased was not verified. PW.7 further admits that on 16.10.2016 the deceased-Smt. Parvathi was not able to give statement according to the Doctors, who gave treatment to the deceased. Ex.P7 statement has been recorded in a printed format. The Medical Officer who treated the deceased had not certified that the deceased was able to give her statement as on 18.10.2016. Ex.P3 PM report marked with consent of both sides clearly reveals that death of Smt. Parvathi was due to septicemia as a result of burn injuries sustained. FSL report marked as Ex.P4 with consent clearly reveals that the sample bottle with kerosene and cloth pieces responded positive for kerosene residues. It is a clear case of suicide by the deceased as per the medical evidence available on record. Mere suicidal death is not sufficient to establish the offence punishable U/s.306 r/w Sec.34 of IPC. The persecution is bound to establish offence of abetment to commit suicide committed by the accused herein beyond all reasonable doubt. There is absolutely no evidence on record to establish that the accused No.1 and 2 abetted the deceased to commit suicide soon before her death.
12 SC No.374/201718.In (2019) 17 Supreme Court Cases 301 (Ude Singh and others Versus State of Haryana) Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "Aabetment" involves a mental process of instigating a person in doing something. A person abets the doing of a thing when:
(i) he instigates any person to do that thing; or
(ii)he engages with one or more persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing; or
(iii) he intentionally aids, by acts or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
These are essential to complete the abetment as a crime. The word "instigate" literally means to provoke, incite, urge on or bring about by persuasion to do anything.
In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be a proof of direct or indirect act/s of incitement to the commission of suicide. It could hardly be disputed that the question of cause of a suicide, particularly in the context of an offence of abetment of suicide, remains a vexed one, involving multifaceted and complex attributes of human behavior and responses/reactions. In the case of accusation for abetment of suicide, the Court would be looking for cogent and convincing proof of the act/s of incitement to the commission of suicide. In the case of suicide, mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by another person would not suffice unless there be 13 SC No.374/2017 such action on the part of the accused which compels the person to commit suicide; and such an offending action ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence. Whether a person has abetted in the commission of suicide by another or not, could only be gathered from the facts and circumstances of each case. Suicidal death of the deceased-Smt. Parvathi itself is not sufficient to establish abetment to commit suicide as discussed in the decisions referred above.
19.The alleged harassment of mental cruelty meted out by the deceased, and offence of abetment committed by the accused has not been established by the prosecution. In AIR 2010 Supreme Court 327 (Gangula Mohan Reddy Vs., State of Andhra Pradesh) it was held that "Mens rea and active act by the accused is essential to constitute offence punishable U/s.306 of IPC.
In 2019 Crl.L.J 2432 (Rajesh Vs., State of Haryana) Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "evidence not disclosing instigation, provocation or encouragement by accused which led deceased to commit suicide. The accused is entitle for acquittal".
20.The alleged intention act of filing false complaint against deceased-Parvathi is not established by the prosecution. Filing of complainant to the police, itself is not a ground to believe that the accused No.1 and 2 have abetted the 14 SC No.374/2017 deceased to commit suicide. The suicide of the deceased might have been the result of serious emotional stress which she might have undergone. The prosecution failed to prove the charge leveled against the accused No.1 and 2 beyond all reasonable doubt. The benefit of doubt shall go to the accused No.1 and 2. Accordingly I answered point No.1 in the Negative.
21. Point No.2: In view of answer point No.1, this court pass the following:
ORDER Acting U/s.235(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 and 2 are hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/s.306 r/w Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code.
The Bail and Surety bonds of accused stand canceled.
MOs1 to 3 shall be destroyed after appeal period is over.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 16th day of January, 2024) (Manjunatha) XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Digitally signed by MANJUNATH MANJUNATH RAMA NAIK RAMA NAIK Date: 2024.01.20 15:22:06 +0530 15 SC No.374/2017 ANNEXURE List of Witnesses examined on behalf of Prosecution:
P.W.1: Sunil P.W.2: Smt. Bharathamma P.W.3: Smt. Deepa P.W.4: Smt. Manjula P.W.5: Mubarak Khan P.W.6: Kondappa.R.N. P.W.7: M. Anil.
List of Documents exhibited on behalf of Prosecution:
Ex.P.1: Complaint Ex.P.2: Inquest Mahazar Ex.P.3: PM Report Ex.P.4: FSL Report Ex.P.5: Mahazar Ex.P.6: Statement of PW.6 Ex.P.7: Dying declaration.
List of Witnesses examined on behalf of Accused:
NIL List of Documents exhibited on behalf of Accused:
NIL List of Material Objects marked on behalf of Prosecution: MO1: Bottle, MO2: Match Box, MO3L Burnt Clothes.
(Manjunatha)
XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru
Digitally signed by
MANJUNATH RAMA
MANJUNATH NAIK
RAMA NAIK Date: 2024.01.20
15:22:20 +0530
16 SC No.374/2017
17 SC No.374/2017
Accused No.1 and 2, and learned counsel
for accused present.
Learned Public Prosecutor present.
Judgment pronounced in the open Court
vide its separate order
ORDER
Acting U/s.235(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused No.1 and 2 are hereby acquitted of the offence punishable U/s.306 r/w Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code.
The Bail and Surety bonds of accused stand canceled. MOs1 to 3 shall be destroyed after appeal period is over.
(Manjunatha) XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru .