Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Archana Pandey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 September, 2019
Author: Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan
Bench: Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan
1 M.Cr.C. No. 19227/2018
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
SINGLE BENCH : JUSTICE SHRI VISHNU PRATAP SINGH
CHAUHAN
MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL CASE NO. 19227/2018
Archana Pandey
Vs.
State of Madhya Pradesh and another
Shri Kashiram Patel, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Ashok Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for
respondent No. 1/State.
Shri Sushil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for
respondent No. 2.
ORDER
(20.09.2019) The applicant has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of the F.I.R. of Crime No. 271/2018 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Betul and other criminal proceedings arises therefrom.
2. The facts giving rise to this petition, in short, are that Crime No.271/2018 registered against the applicant for 2 M.Cr.C. No. 19227/2018 the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. The applicant and deceased worked in District Court Betul. The applicant is married lady, her husband is working in Bangalore and deceased was also a married person. While working in the same department, both developed friendship and applicant, by taking the advantage of that friendship, started pressurizing the deceased and exploited him. Deceased typed suicide letter and signed in the night between 28.02.2018 and 01.03.2018 thereafter consumed some poisonous substance. In the early morning on 01.03.2018, when his wife went for Bathroom and found that deceased was lying dead in the Bathroom, she informed to her-in-laws. Deceased was taken to the hospital where doctor declared him dead on arrival and informed to the police chowky situated at Government Hospital. Marge No.024/18 was registered under Section 174 of the IPC. During inquiry of marge, a suicide note was seized. Some part of the suicide note was written in hand writing of the deceased and that suicide note having the signature of the deceased. After inquiry of the marge, it was found that the applicant involved 3 M.Cr.C. No. 19227/2018 the deceased in love trapped and exploited him and threatened him if he would not fulfill her demand, she would implicate him in any offence and would defame him. The deceased left with no option except to commit suicide in spite of having a family. Crime No. 271/18 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Betul for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC and after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated. She was working in the same department where deceased was worked and she has been transferred to District Court Khandwa in the year 2013 since then, she was living at Khandwa. She never exploited the applicant. Suicide note had falsely been prepared by the parents of the deceased for implicating her falsely in the case. Suicide note was not recovered on the same day of incident, but it had been provided by the father of the deceased after two days of the incident, thus it is concocted and forgedly prepared document. The suicide note was typed on 01.03.2018 and deceased was found dead 4 M.Cr.C. No. 19227/2018 between the night of 28.02.2018 and 01.03.2018. This fact clearly shows that the suicide note was prepared by the parents of the deceased for implicating the applicant falsely in this case, therefore, prays to quash the FIR and other criminal proceedings arising therefrom.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that the applicant trapped the deceased in love affairs and started blackmailing him and exploiting him and also started demanding of money and pressurizing the deceased to get remarry with her. Deceased was under pressure and went into the depression stage and wrote a suicide note, committed suicide by consuming poisonous substance. There is prima facie sufficient materials available against the applicant, therefore, he prays to dismiss the petition.
5. Learned Panel Lawyer for respondent No. 1/State also supported the submissions of respondent No.2.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents filed along with the charge-sheet.
7. On perusal of the suicide note, it reveals that the name of the applicant is clearly mentioned in the suicide note 5 M.Cr.C. No. 19227/2018 and also the act of the applicant as also act of exploitation committed by the applicant is clearly mentioned in the suicide note. That suicide note was signed by the deceased and some part written by the deceased in his own hand writing mentioning the date as 01.03.2018, that suicide note was typed in the office, but, signed on 01.03.2018.
8. Perused the statement of relatives of the deceased recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C.
9. Witness Ku. Subhangi, daughter of the deceased, categorically stated that she is well acquainted with the handwriting and signature of her father and identified the writing and signature of her father on the suicide note. In the same way, hand writing and signature on the suicide note of the deceased was identified by Vinay Raghuvanshi and his wife Yogita @ Karuna.
10. Considering all these facts, if there is prima facie ingredients appear from the evidence collected during investigation, there is no need to quash all the criminal proceedings at this initial stage.
11. Learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance 6 M.Cr.C. No. 19227/2018 on the decision of this Court in the case of Parmal Singh S/o Asharam Kateria (Rajput) and others Vs. State of M.P., 2011(1) MPLJ 340, in which the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had set aside the charges framed under Section 306 of the IPC. In that case, the deceased committed suicide on account of blaming her with the allegation of illicit relations with the applicant. Thus, this Court does not find prima facie ingredient of abatement and discharge the applicant of the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC.
12. In the case of Ramchandra S/o Jagannath Singh Kushvaha Vs. State of M.P., 2009(2) MPLJ 147, learned trial Court did not find the ingredient for abatement and discharged the applicant of the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC. However, in the present case, the applicant filed this petition for quashing of the FIR and other criminal proceedings.
13. On the basis of forgoing discussion, this Court finds that some material available against the applicant. Name and act of the applicant is clearly mentioned in the 7 M.Cr.C. No. 19227/2018 suicide note. Whether the suicide note is concocted, forged or genuine, this fact is to be decided on merits after recording of the evidence. This is not the stage to consider the suicide note on merits.
14. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sau. Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar V. State of Maharastra and others, AIR 2019 SC 847 after referring the previous judgment passed in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. M. Devendrappa and another, (2002) 3 SCC 89 and Indian Oil Corpn. Vs. NEPC India Ltd. and others, (2006) 6 SCC 736 held that correctness of allegations against the accused has to be decided only in trial.
15. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana V. Habib Abdullah Jeelani and others, AIR 2017 SC 373 categorically held in para 12 which reads as under:-
"12. There can be no dispute over the proposition that inherent power in a matter of quashment of FIR has to be exercised sparingly and with caution and when and only when such exercise is justified by the test 8 M.Cr.C. No. 19227/2018 specifically laid down in the provision itself. There is no denial of the fact that the power under Section 482 CrPC is very wide but it needs no special emphasis to state that conferment of wide power requires the court to be more cautious. It casts an onerous and more diligent duty on the Court."
16. After considering the whole arguments, evidence collected during investigation and the law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the above cited case-laws, this Court is of the view that this is not the fit case to exercise the inherent powers envisaged under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashing the criminal proceeding.
17. Accordingly, this petition is devoid of any substance and the same is hereby dismissed without any order as to costs.
(Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan) Judge ashish Digitally signed by ASHISH KUMAR LILHARE Date: 2019.09.23 10:37:35 +05'30'