Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Sarla Ratnakar Dhumal, filed a criminal application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of FIR No.427 of 2019 registered at Pundliknagar Police Station, Aurangabad, for the offence punishable under Section 305 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the consequent charge-sheet bearing No.131 of 2020 leading to R.C.C. No.331 of 2021 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad. The FIR was lodged by respondent No.2, Janardhan Dattoo Khirsagar, alleging that on 17 October 2019, the applicant, who runs a shop adjacent to the informant's house, accused the informant's 12-year-old son Suraj of stealing Rs.50 from her cash box. The applicant went to the school where Suraj and his sister Shraddha studied, shouted that Suraj had stolen money, and chased him. Fearing assault and defamation, Suraj ran away and later committed suicide by lying on a railway track. The informant alleged that the applicant abetted the suicide. The investigation culminated in a charge-sheet. The applicant contended that even if the FIR and collected evidence are taken at face value, they do not constitute the ingredients of abetment to commit suicide under Section 305 IPC. The court examined the statements of witnesses, including the sister Shraddha recorded under Section 164 CrPC, which did not support the prosecution. The court held that there was no mens rea or direct instigation by the applicant; the mere allegation of theft and chasing, without any intention to cause suicide, does not amount to abetment. The court quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings, allowing the application.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Abetment of Suicide - Section 305 IPC - Ingredients of Abetment - The court examined whether the allegations that the accused shouted that the deceased child had stolen Rs.50 and chased him, leading to his suicide, constitute abetment under Section 305 IPC. Held that mere allegation of theft and chasing without any direct instigation or mens rea does not satisfy the ingredients of abetment to commit suicide. (Paras 5-7) B) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Inherent Powers - The court considered the scope of quashing proceedings when the allegations do not prima facie constitute an offence. Held that where the FIR and charge-sheet do not disclose any offence, the High Court can exercise inherent powers to quash the proceedings to prevent abuse of process. (Paras 5-8) C) Evidence - Statement under Section 164 CrPC - Minor's Testimony - The court noted that the statement of the daughter of the informant, recorded under Section 164 CrPC, did not support the prosecution case. Held that the evidence collected does not establish any act of instigation or abetment by the accused. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR and charge-sheet disclose ingredients of offence under Section 305 IPC for abetment of suicide of a minor, and whether the proceedings are liable to be quashed.
Final Decision
Application allowed. FIR No.427 of 2019 registered with Pundliknagar Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad for offence under Section 305 IPC, charge-sheet No.131 of 2020, and R.C.C. No.331 of 2021 pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad, are quashed and set aside.
Law Points
- Abetment of suicide
- Section 305 IPC
- Mens rea
- Instigation
- Quashing of FIR
- Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC
