Penal Code, 1860 – s. 306 – Appellant’s son and daughterin-law were teachers in a school where the respondent was also a teacher – Respondent allegedly used to call on the mobile of the appellant’s daughter-in-law and harass her – Despite the efforts of the appellant’s son in trying to make the first respondent see reason and stop calling his wife, the respondent continued calling her repeatedly – Appellant’s son committed suicide – FIR filed against the respondent – Quashed – Propriety of – Held: There are definite allegations that the respondent would keep on calling the wife of the victim on her mobile and keep harassing her – Allegations are supported by the statements of the mother and the wife of the victim recorded during investigation – 3-4 days prior to the suicide there was an altercation between the victim and the respondent – In the light of these facts, coupled with the fact that the suicide note made definite allegation against the respondent, the High Court was not justified in entering into question whether the respondent had the requisite intention to aid or instigate or abate the commission of suicide at this stage when the investigation was yet to be completed and charge-sheet, if any, was yet to be filed – Order of the High Court set aside – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482. Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 There are definite allegations that the first respondent would keep on calling the wife of the victim on her mobile and keep harassing her which allegations are supported by the statements of the mother and the wife of the victim recorded during investigation. The record shows that 3-4 days prior to the suicide there was an altercation between the victim and the first respondent. In the light of these facts, coupled with the fact that the suicide note made definite allegation against first respondent, the High Court was not justified in entering into question whether the first respondent had the requisite intention to aid or instigate or abate the commission of suicide. At this juncture when the investigation was yet to be completed and charge-sheet, if any, was yet to be filed, the High Court ought not to have gone into the aspect whether there was requisite mental element or intention on part of the respondent. The judgment and order under appeal is, therefore, set aside. Since the investigation into the matter was stalled as a result of the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the concerned authorities are directed to complete the investigation as early as possible. [Paras 13, 14][238-C-G]
Netai Dutta v. State of W.B. (2005) 2 SCC 659 ; M. Mohan v. State represented by
the
Deputy
Superintendent of Police (2011) 3 SCC 626 : [2011] 3 SCR 437 ; State of Kerala and Others v. S.
Unnikrishnan Nair and Others. (2015) 9 SCC 639 : [2015] 9 SCR 56 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.