Madhya Pradesh High Court
Heeramani Tripathi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 July, 2017
CRR-1061-2017
(HEERAMANI TRIPATHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
21-07-2017
Shri Anoop Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Ms. Sharda Dubey, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.
This petition is directed against order dated 24/01/2017 passed by the Second ASJ, Chhatarpur in S.T. No.213/2016, wherein charges have been framed against the petitioners for offence under Section 306 of IPC.
The prosecution story in brief is that, Neelam was married to petitioner No.2/Upendra Tripathi in the year 2006. Petitioner No.1 is the father of petitioner No.2. It is alleged that Neelam committed suicide by administering poison on 29/01/2015. Her postmortem report reveals that she died due to cardio respiratory arrest. The viscera was send for examination to Medico Legal Institute. The report show that "zinc phosphide" found in the viscera which is indicative of poison may be a pesticide. After investigation, it was found that due to the cruelty and harassment meted by the deceased in the hands of the petitioners, she has committed suicide. Charge-sheet has been filed under Section 306 of IPC. Learned Second ASJ, Chhatarpur framed charge as mentioned above.
The petitioner claimed that the learned trial Court has erred in framing the charge against the petitioner. The petitioners have been falsely implicated. Deceased died due to accidentally consuming of poison, while living in her parental house. The marriage was performed 9 years before the incident. There is no complaint of cruelty earlier to this incident, only omnibus allegation have been made, but there is no evidence with regard to abetment or instigation to the deceased to commit suicide, hence the order impugned be set aside.
Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State vehemently opposing the contentions submits that one year earlier to the incident, the deceased had consumed rat killer. Because of the cruelty meted to her subsequently by the petitioners she committed suicide. The statement of father of the deceased Lakshman Prasad under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. is important in this regard.
On perusal of the case diary, it is evident that deceased Neelam died due to consumption of poisonous substance. In the FSL report, "zinc phosphide" was found.
In the statement of Lakshaman Prasad recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., he made it clear that the petitioner No.2/husband had subjected Neelam to cruelty. He also aborted her pregnancy 4-5 times. Because of which, the relation between him and deceased wife was estranged. Upendra is in the habit of consuming alcohol and beating her. Because of the harassment by her husband and father-in-law, she was upset. On 28/01/2015, the deceased was brought to her maternal home in serious condition. On the following day, she become more serious and was taken for treatment. At about 11:10 am. She was declared dead. According to the prosecution story, she consumed poison because of the harassment caused to her by the accused persons.
Arguments on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no iota of evidence that the deceased was harassed by the petitioners. But the preliminary evidence show that deceased attempted to commit suicide by consuming rat killer. Subsequently, because of her husband's behaviour and ill treatment.
In the statement of Lakshman Prasad under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. reveals that Neelam was harassed by her husband and father- in-law. Therefore, she consumed some poison and ended her life.
In this regard, reference can be made to Milind Bhagwanrao Godse Vs. State of Maharashtra & another reported as (2009) 3 SCC 699, in which it is held that, "Penal Code, 1860- Ss. 498, 306 and 109 r/w S.34- Cruelty and abetment of suicide- Whether offences of, made out- Proof of-Extreme mental cruelty meted out to deceased wife (serving as a Lecturer) by economically dependent advocate husband (not settled in practice)- Number of instances of mental tortoure proved from the evidence of PWs 6, 7 and 8 (neighbour, sister and father of the deceased respectively)- Suicide note/letter written to the father of deceased giving graphic description of the number of instances of constant extreme mental torture and appellant's deriving sadistic pleasure in torturing the deceased- Courts below relying on circumstances enumerated in the suicide note and testimony of PWs 6, 7 and 8 and giving concurrent finding regarding extreme mental cruelty- Appellant created circumstances which left no option for the wife but to take an extreme step of putting an end to her life- Therefore, conviction under Ss. 498-A, 306 and 109 r/w S.34, upheld- Constitution of India- Art. 136- Interference in criminal matters- Concurrent conviction- Om facts, upheld.
The truthfulness or otherwise of the statement could not be assessed and concluded at this initial stage of framing charge. At this stage, the Court is not required to undertake and an elaborate enquiry. It is not necessary to delve deep into various aspects. Suffice, it to say that in the preliminary evidence Neelam was brought to her paternal house by the petitioners in a serious condition. On the following day, she died. The postmortem report and the FSL report show that she died due to consumption of pesticide, therefore, the commission of offence is a probable consequence, hence framing of charge exist at this stage.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
(SUSHIL KUMAR PALO) JUDGE RS