Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 Date of decision: 29.11.2010 Sharanjit Kaur and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.H.K.Dhillon, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.J.S.Sandhu, AAG, Punjab. None for respondent No.2. **** SABINA, J. This petition has been filed under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging order dated 12.11.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, whereby charge was framed against the petitioners under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The contents of the complaint (Annexure P-1), read as under. “1. That the complainant is a widow and an old lady. The family of the complainant enjoys good Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 2 reputation in the city and common people. 2. That the marriage of Tirathpal Singh son of the complainant was solemnized about 7 years ago with Sharanjit Kaur accused No.1, and tow daughters Mehakdeep Kaur and Navdeep Kaur who are aged about 5 years and 3 ½ years, were born out of this wedlock and both minor children are living with the complainant. Accused No. 2 Karnail Singh, accused No. 3 Manjit Kaur are the parents of Sharanjit Kaur. Accused Gurnaib Singh @ Kala and Raghbir Singh are real brothers of the petitioner No. 1. 3. That Tirathpal Singh since deceased son of the complainant was B.Com and enjoyed good reputation in the City. He was a God fearing, peace loving person and wanted to live peacefully and happily with his family but accusd No. 1 Sharnjit Kaur is a hot tempered and greedy woman and of similar nature are other members of her family who are the co- accusd. The rude language, greediness and harassment of all accused had compelled by son Tirathpal Singh since deceased to live a life of pain and tension and made the life of complainant and her family members hell. All accused were compelling Tirathpal Singh son of the complainant to transfer his land and Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 3 cash in the name of the petitioner No. 1. The accused were advised by the relatives to improve their behaviour but it had no effect. Instead, all accused started threatening Tirathpal Singh that they would falsely implicate him, his sisters and brothers in law and other family members in cases of dowry at Bathinda and said that Karnail Singh accused was a political leader and he had connections with Senior Police Officers. On other petty matters, Sharnjit Kaur Accused No. 1 used to beat the minor children and instigated Tirathpal Singh to fulfill her unjust demands. There was a tense atmosphere in the house. So much so that Sharnjit Kaur used to cook and eat alone and abused the complainant and her family members. The son of complainant, Tirath Pal Singh bore this silently. Accused No. 2 to 5 always incited accused Sharnjit Kaur that she should get the land and cash of Tirath Pal transferred in her own name. So the health of Tirath Pal Singh deteriorated day by day. He was an intelligent and educated 34 years old young man but due to bad greedy and harsh behaviour of accused, there was always fight in the house and Tirathpal Singh was very disappointed. 4. That on 24.4.2004, accused Sharnjit Kaur, Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 4 went to her parents house alongwithher costly jewellery and clothes after quarrelling with complainant and her family, and after reaching there, petitioner No. 1 asked her father accused No. 2 to call Joginder Singh, son in law of the complainant and threatened him that if Tirath Pal Singh did not transfer the land and cash in the name of Sharanjit Kaur, they will falsely implicate the entire family of Tirathpal Singh including sisters and other women in dowry cases at Bathinda and get the legs of Tirathpal Singh broken. Joginder Singh told this to Tirathpal Singh, so he was terrified. Tirathpal Singh advised Sharanjit Kaur accused No. 1 telephonically not to spoil the life of the family and children, but instead accused No. 1 threatened to implicate him in false cases, so Tirathpal Singh was very scared and for two days, kept lying at home disappointed and sad. 5. That on 27.4.2004, Tirathpal Singh, at about 5 P.M., consumed some poisonous substance to commit suicide, when complainant and other members of the family saw Tripathi Singh foaming from the mouth then complainant called her domestic servant Maghar Singh and other members, then Maghar Singh, Parveen Kaur etc. reached the place of occurrence but the neck of Tirathpal was bent towards one side. Complainant and Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 5 the above mentioned persons shook Tirathpal Singh and tried to revive him, but he could not be saved, and at about 6 P.M. he died. Complainant is an old widow of 70 years her elder son Iqbal Singh had earlier died of Cancer in the year 2002. After the death of Triathpal Singh, complainant lost her senses and Triathpal Singh was cremated without any checkup by doctor or postmortem on the next day when other relatives reached. 6. That on 27.4.2004, Triathpal Singh had written a letter and signed it before committing suicide, which was found from his room, on reading it, it transpired that Tirathpal Singh s/o Complainant had committed suicide due to the threats of the accused, and on the instigation and harassment on the part of accused, he had taken this step of committing suicide, the above said accused are responsible for his suicide and death. The hand written note of Triathpal Singh is as below:- Respected Sat Sri Akal I, Triathpal Singh s/o Didar Singh r/o Patiala Gate, Nabha solemnly affirm and state that I wanted to live, I also loved life but my Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 6 wife Sharanjit Kaur, my father in law Karnail Singh, my mother in law and both my brothers in law Kala and Raghbir Singh r/o Mehraj have threatened and tortured me so much that it was become difficult to live. My wife used to threaten me and my family of implicating them under dowry prohibition law and used to insult my family. The family of my in laws had taken away the peace of my family by threatening telephonically to send my family to jail. I wanted to live but I prefer to die once instead of dying daily. I am dying today. My wife and above said persons are responsible for my death. Whosoever reads my letter is requested to get justice for me. I also wanted to live but these persons compelled me to die. My request is that they should be punished harshly, so that no one else dies like me. If justice is not done to me, my soul shall never be at peace. Sd/- in English Tirathpal Singh 7.That after the death of Tirathpal Singh, the accused have taken Rs. 10 lakh cash from the complainant and Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 7 her family on 17.5.2004 by threatening and harassing unjustly, which shows the greed and harsh attitude of the accused that they had taken this step only a few days after the death of Tirathpal Singh. The accused had no grief on the death of Tirathpal Singh but they were greedy to usurp his property. Accused No. 1 herself left her minor daughters with the complainant and openly talked about remarrying. That is why complainant filed a petition under Section 8 of Guradian and Wards Act in the court of ld. Civil Judge Nabha, whose copy is attached herewith. Accused No. 1 and her other family members did not care for the minor daughters, which showed that accused have no sympathy or love for them. Although accused have already taken Rs. 10 lakh from the complainant, still to usurp the property of Tirathpal Singh accused have filed false civil cases against complainant and her family members. 8. That the complainant had approached the police officers at Nabha many times complaining against the accused and also supplied the hand written suicide note of Tirathpal Singh and has been appearing before other senior officers who kept assuring that action will be taken against the accused, but accused Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 8 are rich and politically well connected. Karnail Singh accused who himself is a political leader, does not permit any action in connivance with the police. A few days back, police has declined to take any action against the accused, hence, this complaint is being filed without any delay. Copy of the application is attached herewith. 9. That Tirathpal Singh has committed the suicide at the instigation of all accused, for which all accused themselves are responsible. This hand written note was found from the room of Tirath Pal Singh at Nabha. Hence, this Court has the jurisdiction to try this complaint. So complaint is being filed, all accused be summoned under Section 306/34 IPC and punished. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the complaint in the present case was liable to be quashed as it had been filed as a counter blast to the suit filed by petitioner No.1 seeking a direction for restraining the complainant party to alienate the property. Tirath Pal Singh had died on 27.4.2004, whereas, the complaint in question was filed on 23.3.2005. Suit had been filed by petitioner No.1 on 24.1.2005. The dead body of Tirath Pal Singh was not subjected to postmortem examination and hence, there was no medical evidence qua alleged unnatural death of the deceased. The Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 9 suicide note in question was recovered on the same day from the dead body but no complaint was lodged immediately with the police nor the dead body was sent for postmortem examination. No reliance could be placed on the suicide note also as it was allegedly written in Punjabi and signed in English by the deceased. There was no opinion of an expert that the writing on the suicide note was of the deceased. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance on Amarjit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab 2009 (3) Law Herald (P&H) 1861, wherein, in para 10, it was held as under:- “ Another striking feature of the present case which prompts me to exercise the inherent power to quash the FIR is that no post-mortem has been conducted. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, learned Assistant Advocate General on instructions from ASI Goldy Virdi has fairly stated that no post-mortem took place. In the absence of any post- mortem report the cause of death cannot be ascertained and there is no material whatsoever to indicate that the deceased died an unnatural death. In fact the complainant in the FIR has also stated that the deceased suffered an attack. The present petitioners cannot be prosecuted for the offence of abetment to suicide when there is no evidence to suggest that the deceased had committed suicide. Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 10 For the aforesaid reasons, the present petition is allowed and the FIR along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed qua the present petitioners.” In the said case, it was alleged that a written note from the pocket of the deceased was recovered that he had committed suicide because Mohan Singh and others including the petitioner had not returned his money. Learned counsel has further placed reliance on Sohan Raj Sharma vs. State of Haryana 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 810, wherein in para Nos. 10 and 11, it was held as under:- “10. Section 107 IPC defines abetment of a thing. The offence of abetment is a separate and distinct offence provided in the Act as an offence. A person, abets the doing of a thing when (1) he instigates any person to do that thing; (2) engages with one or more other persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing; or (3) intentionally aids, by act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. These things are essential to complete abetment as a crime. The word “instigate” literally means to provoke, incite, urge on or bring about by persuasion to do anything. The abetment may be by instigation, conspiracy or intentional aid, as provided in the three clauses of Section 107. Section 109 provides that if the act abetted is committed in consequence of abetment Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 11 and there is no provision for the punishment of such abetment, then the offender is to be punished with the punishment provided for the original offence. 'Abetted' in Section 109 means the specific offence abetted. Therefore, the offence for the abetment of which a person is charged with the abetment is normally linked with the proved offence. 11. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of suicide. The mere fact that the husband treated the deceased wife with cruelty is not enough.” Learned counsel has also placed reliance on Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2002 (2) RCR (Criminal)687, wherein in para 13, it was alleged as under:- “Reverting to the facts of the case, both the courts below have erroneously accepted the prosecution story that the suicide by the deceased is the direct result of the quarrel that had taken place on 25th July, 1998 wherein it is alleged the appellant had used abusive language and had reportedly told the deceased 'to go and die'. For this, the courts relied on a statement of Shashi Bhushan, brother of the deceased, made under Section 161 Cr. P.C. when reportedly the deceased, after coming back from the house of the appellant, told him that the Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 12 appellant had humiliated him and abused him with filthy words. The statement of Shashi Bhushan, recorded under Section 161 Cr. P.C. is annexed as annexure P-3 to this appeal and going through the statement, we find that he has not stated that the deceased had told him that the appellant had asked him 'to go and die'. Even if we accept the prosecution story that the appellant did tell the deceased 'to go and die', that itself does not constitute the ingredient of 'instigation'. The word 'instigate' denotes incitement or urging tot do some drastic or unadvisable action or to stimulate or incite. Presence of mens rea, therefore, is the necessary concomitant of instigation. It is common knowledge that the words uttered in a quarrel or in a spur of the moment cannot be taken to be uttered with mens rea. It is in a fit of anger and emotional. Secondly, the alleged abusive words, said to have been told to the deceased were on 25th July, 1998 ensued by quarrel. The deceased was found hanging on 27th July, 1998. Assuming that the deceased had taken the abusive language seriously, he had enough time in between on think over and reflect and, therefore, it cannot be said that the abusive language, which had been used by the appellant on 25th July, 1998 derived the deceased to commit suicide. Suicide by the deceased on 27th July, Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 13 1998 is not proximate to the abusive language uttered by the appellant on 25th July, 1998. The fact that the deceased committed suicide on 27th July, 1998 would itself clearly point out that it is not the direct result of the quarrel taken place on 25th July, 1998 when it is alleged that the appellant had used the abusive language and also told the deceased to go and die. This fact had escaped notice of the courts below.” None has appeared on behalf of respondent No.2 Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the petition. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the present petition deserves to be allowed. In the present case, admittedly Tirathpal Singh got married with Sharanjit Kaur and they were blessed with two daughters out of the wedlock. Tirathpal Singh died on 27.4.2004. Sharanjit Kaur had gone to her parental house on 24.4.2004. The case of the complainant is that Tirathpal Singh had consumed poison on account of harassment and threats meted out to him by the petitioners. The complainant, who is the mother of deceased Tirathpal Singh, had filed a complaint for initiation of action against the petitioners. The complainant has also placed reliance on a suicide note alleged to have been written by the deceased before he consumed poison. Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 14 There are material infirmities in the case set up by the complainant. Tirathpal Singh had died on 27.4.2004, whereas, the complaint has been filed on 23.3.2005. There is a long un-explained delay in filing the complaint. The complainant has alleged in the complaint that a hand written note of the deceased was found from his room. Despite the said fact, no action was taken by the complainant immediately against the petitioners. The suicide note is alleged to have been written in Punjabi and is signed in English by the deceased. This makes the suicide note a doubtful document. The deceased was an educated man and in case, he had actually written the note, he would have either written it in English and signed in English or could have written it in Punjabi and signed in Punjabi. Petitioner No.1 has filed a civil suit on 24.1.2005 seeking permanent injunction restraining complainant Ajmer Kaur and other family members from alienating the properties inherited by Mehakdeep Kaur and Navdeep Kaur, minor daughters of deceased Tirathpal Singh. It appears that the complaint has been filed as a counter blast to the said suit. The dead body of the deceased was not sent for postmortem examination. In these circumstances, there is no medical evidence to substantiate the plea of the complainant that Tirathpal Singh had, in fact, committed suicide by consuming poison. Had the deceased committed suicide, in normal circumstances, the complainant would have informed the police immediately as the Crl.Rev.No. 652 of 2010 15 complainant had recovered a suicide note allegedly written by the deceased. However, the police was not immediately informed and the dead body was cremated without sending it for postmortem examination. This leads to the inference that the complainant wants to avoid inheritance of property left by the deceased, by petitioner No.1 and her daughters. In these circumstances, the trial Court has erred in framing charge against the petitioners under Section 306 IPC. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, continuation of criminal proceedings would be nothing but an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 12.11.2009, whereby charge was framed against the petitioners under Section 306 IPC, is set aside. Consequently, the petitioners are discharged. (SABINA) JUDGE November 29, 2010 anita