1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.09.2019 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE [ENTITY] [CASE NUMBER] and [CASE NUMBER] CRL.O.P.(MD)No.7214 of 2016 [ENTITY] Petitioner/Accused No.6 Vs. 1. The [ENTITY] rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Koppampaatti Police Station, Thoothukudi District. ([CASE NUMBER]) Respondent/Complainant 2. [ENTITY] Respondent/ Defacto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition is filed under [SECTION] of [ACT], to call for the records in connection with the impugned charge sheet in [CASE NUMBER] on the file of the learned [ENTITY], Fast Track Mahila Court, Thoothukudi, in so far as the petitioner is concerned and quash the same. http: www.judis.nic.in 2 For Petitioners : Mr.[ENTITY] For R-1 : Mr.[ENTITY], Government Advocate(Crl. Side). For R-2 : No appearance. CRL.O.P.(MD)No.2734 of 2017 [ENTITY] Petitioner/Accused No.7 Vs. 1. The [ENTITY] rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Koppampaatti Police Station, Thoothukudi District. ([CASE NUMBER]) Respondent/Complainant 2. [ENTITY] Respondent/ Defacto Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original petition is filed under [SECTION] of [ACT], to call for the records relating to the charge sheet in [CASE NUMBER] on the file of the Fast Track Mahila Court, Thoothukudi and quash the same as illegal in so far as the petitioner is concerned. For Petitioner : Mr.[ENTITY] For R-1 : Mr.[ENTITY], Government Advocate(Crl. Side). For R-2 : No appearance. http: www.judis.nic.in 3 COMMON ORDER
The family of the defacto complainant had their house right behind the Panchayat Union in North Semaputhur Village. Fund was sanctioned for construction of compound wall. It was noticed that unless they were vacated, it would not be possible to construct the compound wall. The family of the defacto complainant refused to vacate the same. In this regard, a dispute arose with accused Nos.1 to 5 who are the local villagers and who were interested in the construction of the compound wall. The victim who is the mother of the defacto complainant is said to have threatened them that if they insisted that they should vacate, she will go to the extent of committing suicide. Ignoring the threat held out by the deceased, accused Nos.1 to 5 are said to have dug the pits on 23.10.2013. The victim [ENTITY] once again raised her objection. Thereupon, accused Nos.1 to 5 had uttered certain offending words against [ENTITY]. Unable to bear the same, [ENTITY] is said to have consumed Pesticide and died. In this regard, the second respondent herein lodged an information with Koppampatti police station leading to registration of [CASE NUMBER]. The case was initially registered under [SECTION] of [ACT], and later it was altered http: www.judis.nic.in to one under [SECTION] of [ACT] After examining the various witnesses, final report was filed against accused Nos.1 to 5. Cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed to the Sessions Court and made over to the [ENTITY], Fast Track Mahila Court, Thoothukudi, for trial in [CASE NUMBER]. After the trial commenced, P.W.1 was examined. P.W.1 in her deposition stated that accused Nos.1 to 5 committed the act at the instigation of these petitioners. Therefore, the Court below invoking the provision under [SECTION] of [ACT], implicated these petitioners as accused Nos.6 and
7. To quash the same, these Criminal Original petitions have been filed.
2. Accused No.6 was the jurisdictional Sub Inspector of Police during the relevant time and accused No.7 was the Headmistress of the Panchayat Union Middle school.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the accused and the learned Government Advocate(Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent.
http: www.judis.nic.in
4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the recent decision reported in AIR (2019) SC 478(Rajesh V. [ENTITY] of Haryana) has held as follows:-
7. It is necessary to refer to [SECTION] [ACT] and [SECTION] [ACT] which reads as under:
306. Abetment of suicide If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
107. Abetment of a thing A person abets the doing of a thing, who -
First Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1 A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing.
8. Conviction under [SECTION] of [ACT] is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate http: www.judis.nic.in to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide. In order to bring a case within the purview of [SECTION] [ACT], there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. Therefore, the act of abetment by the person charged with the said offence must be proved and established by the prosecution before he could be convicted under [SECTION] [ACT] (See Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu V. [ENTITY] of West Bengal( (2010) 1 SCC 707).
9. The term instigation under [SECTION] [ACT] has been explained in Chitresh Kumar Chopra V. [ENTITY] (Govt. of NCT of Delhi( (2009) 16 SCC 605) as follows:
'16. Speaking for the three-Judge Bench in [PRECEDENT], [ENTITY], J. (as His Lordship then was) said that instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. To satisfy the requirement of instigation, though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. Where the accused had, by his acts or omission or by a http: www.judis.nic.in continued course of conduct, created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, in which case, an instigation may have to be inferred. A word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation.
17. Thus, to constitute investigation, a person who instigates another has to provoke, incite, urge or encourage the doing of an act by the other by goadingor urging forward. The dictionary meaning of the word goad is a thing that stimulates someone into action; provoke to action or reaction(see Concise Oxford English Dictionary); to keep irritating or annoying somebody until he reacts(see Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, 7th Edn.).'
10. Words uttered in a fit of anger or omission without any intention cannot be termed as instigation. (See Praveen Pradhan V. [ENTITY] of Uttaranchal(2012) 9 SCC 734).
5. Applying the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, by no stretch of imagination the petitioners can be said to have intended that [ENTITY] should die. Accused No.6 was only a jurisdictional Sub Inspector of Police. Accused No.7 was the Headmistress. [ENTITY] fell into depression following the quarrel with accused Nos.1 to 5.
http: www.judis.nic.in
6. I am of the view that the essential ingredients of [SECTION] of [ACT] are not attracted as far as the petitioners are concerned. In this view of the matter, the impugned proceedings are quashed as far as the petitioners are concerned. These Criminal Original petitions stand allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.
12.09.2019 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No pmu To 1. The Judge, [ENTITY], Fast Track Mahila Court, Thoothukudi. 2. The Inspector of Police, Koppampaatti Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. http: www.judis.nic.in [ENTITY],J.
pmu [CASE NUMBER] and [CASE NUMBER] 12.09.2019 http: www.judis.nic.in