1. Rule. Taken up for final hearing by consent at the stage of admission. Heard submissions at the Bar. The Petitioners have prayed for to quash and set aside the charge-sheet dated 30/12/2010, in Criminal Case No.114 of 2010, filed before the Judicial Magistrate, Kelapur, Taluka Kelapur, District Yavatmal (copy annexed with the petitions). The Petitioners were charge-sheeted for alleged offences punishable under Section 306 and 284 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Pandharkawada Police Station in District Yavatmal reported that on 22/02/2010, Deputy Conservator of Forest Shri. Gopalrao Kisanrao Kale at about 7.00 to 9.30 a.m., at his official residence had consumed poison and committed suicide. The oral report was lodged by one Shri. Shamu Bhadu Rathod and accidental death case was registered as A D Case No. 16 of 2010 under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code. An alleged suicide note was seized mentioning thus:-
The suicide note dated 22/02/2010 attributed that with a view to cause mental harassment to the writer, Shri. Tongo, Shri Potulwar and Shri Chondhikar took assistance of Clerks Shaikh and Mr. D. V Shukla and published false information against him in Daily "Sahasik" therefore he is defamed in the society. One Farukh Khan Pathan of "Aaj tak Channel" and a Senior journalist are blackmailing. They are causing hurdle in the official work and are not helping. They are instigating employees in the office to leave office during the working hours. Apart from this, incompetent employees like Shri. Bhise, Shri. Pattiwar are provided to Divisional Office due to which no work can be taken from them. With this reference correspondence is made to Higher authorities but no action has been taken in that regard. Hence I am committing suicide being tired of harassment by Tongo, Chondhikar, Clerk Shaikh and D.V. Shukla. They are wholly responsible for this. Police Inspector Shri C. B. Bais of the Pandharkawada recorded the complaint lodged by Sau. Prabha Gopal Kale, widow of the deceased. The statement of Prabha stated that she had occasion to talk with her Husband on Phone at the evening of 21/02/2010 from Nanded where she had gone to see her sick Mother. At that time her Husband had informed her that he is not feeling to take food when advised by her to take medicines and have dinner, he replied that nobody is cooperating in the office and work could not be done. He has severe tension of office. The investigation revealed that the deceased had consumed insecticide "Nuon". Series of newspaper reports had appeared against the deceased illegal felling of trees and selling them to contractor of their choice alleging the corruption against the forest officials Gopal Kale (deceased as also Rajan Tongo (one of the accused)). The news paper reports requested the Government to take action in to alleged wrongdoings and corrupt practices by the forest officials, mainly the deceased Gopal Kale in Pandharkawada Forest Division.
3. On behalf of the Petitioners it is submitted that the alleged suicide note is vague as it accuses the petitioners that they revealed the information to journalists who published the News reports. It is contended that when an hypersensitive, depressed or mentally quite infirm person take a drastic step to end his life or a person commit suicide in utter fit of anger and emotion it can not be said that the suicide was abetted. Forest Officials in Pandharkawada were required to look after the Forest administration, perform duties to explore, regenerate and protect the forest in accordance with the sanctioned working plan. The Divisional Forest Officials are required to conduct Sale, Contract, supply material to department and the Public and to raise revenue and control the expenditure and to deal with the forest cases with requisite transparency. The accusations in the Charge- sheet were not at all made out as there was no prima facie ground whatsoever to believe and proceed ahead with accusations of alleged extortion and abetment against them. Although Petitioners as Government officials were discharging their official duties and were sought to be prosecuted on the ground of work of the government officials allegedly creating hurdles and not helping in the Government work, cognizance is prima facie barred as no statutorily required sanction was obtained by the investigating agency to prosecute them as contemplated under section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 107 of 2011 is a Range Forest Officer. He had worked only for five months under the deceased Gopal Kale, that too in two separate spells in the year 2009 and 2010. The Petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 108 of 2011 had been subordinate to the deceased and was appointed as Public Information Officer by the deceased himself and it was his official duty as such to furnish information required by members of Public. It is urged that even if the version of the prosecution is accepted as a gospel truth imputations made in suicide note can never be construed as an act of abetment to the deceased for to commit suicide or his extortion. It is absolutely illogical to say that the subordinate officer lower in authority would be in a position to mentally harass the superior officer when superior officer is able to take departmental action for disobedience, if any and use his power and authority and report for administrative action like suspension, transfer, etc. There was never any such report against the Petitioner Shri. Rajendra Tongo. On the contrary deceased had given outstanding report in favor of the Petitioner. The Petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 109 of 2011 Shri. Potulwar is a Logging Officer at Pandharkawada and he was subordinate officer of Shri. Gopal Kale and had also worked as Information Officer under Right to Information Act. The Petitioners even assuming that they had supplied information to the journalists were acting within the course of discharge of their duties and never did anything which could engineer the suicide of Late. Shri Gopal Kale.
According to learned Counsel for the Petitioners, no any material appeared in the Charge-sheet to constitute the ingredients of the offences punishable under Section 384 and Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. No any willful act or omission can be attributed to the Petitioners to impute criminal liability for any aid or intention to instigate an act of suicide by Late Shri. Gopal Kale or extortion.
4. According to learned APP the deceased was fed up with the employees who supplied the information to Journalists. Deceased had not fulfilled the illegal demands of the journalists who published defamatory and derogatory articles in newspapers. The employees of the Forest Department did not cooperate with the deceased which led to his depression to write suicide note and to die by consuming poison "Nuon". Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the news paper reports had maligned and shattered the reputation and image of the deceased in the society. He submitted that there is enough material to proceed further in the case and prayed for dismissal of the Petitions.
5. While considering the rival submissions in the light of material sought to be relied upon at the Bar, it must be noted that the term 'Abetment' means to instigate, urge forward, to provoke, to incite, or to encourage to do or to goad doing of an act. The materials collected in the Charge-sheet do not spell out the accusation of abetment. Suicide note alleges that the Petitioners were revealing the information to journalists who published the news reports imputing corrupt practices to the Forest Officials including the Petitioner Shri Rajan Tongo. In the present day information age it is normal that the watchful eye of the Media people Public servants are in the Media glare who may allege corruption in public offices for lack of transparency. No reasonable prudent and well balanced person would turn hypersensitive and to get depressed by anger or emotion to such an extent that he would ruin himself. The honest person can react with boldness to face the allegations and insist upon that the truth shall prevail. Learned APPs could not lay their hands on any material from the Charge-sheet to buttress the submissions against the Petitioners as advanced on behalf of the State.
The learned counsel for the Petitioners made reference to the ruling in Netai Dutta V/s. State of W.B. (2005)2 SCC 659, The Apex court observed thus:-
"There is absolutely no averment in the alleged suicide note that the present appellant had caused any harm to him or was in any way responsible for delay in paying salary to deceased Pranab Kumar Nag. It seems that the deceased was very much dissatisfied with the working conditions at the work place. But, it may also be noticed that the deceased after his transfer in 1999 had never joined the office at 160 B.L. Saha Road, Kolkata and had absented himself for a period of two years and that the suicide took place on 16.2.2001. It cannot be said that the present appellant had in any way instigated the deceased to commit suicide or he was responsible for the suicide of Pranab Kumar Nag. An offence under Section 306 IPC would stand only if there is an abetment for the commission of the crime. The parameters of the "abetment" have been stated in Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 107 says that a person abets the doing of a thing, who instigates any person to do that thing; or 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, or the person should have intentionally aided any act or illegal omission. The explanation to Section 107 says that any willful misrepresentation or willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, may also come within the contours of "abetment".
In the suicide note, except referring to the name of the appellant at two places, there is no reference of any act or incidence whereby the appellant herein is alleged to have committed any willful act or omission or intentionally aided or instigated the deceased Pranab Kumar Nag in committing the act of suicide. There is no case that the appellant has played any part or any role in any conspiracy, which ultimately instigated or resulted in the commission of suicide by deceased Pranab Kumar Nag.
Apart from the suicide note, there is no allegation made by the complainant that the appellant herein in any way was harassing his brother, Pranab Kumar Nag. The case registered against the appellant is without any factual foundation. The contents of the alleged suicide note do not in any way make out the offence against the appellant. The prosecution initiated against the appellant would only result in sheer harassment to the appellant without any fruitful Result.
When there is no sufficient and reasonable ground to proceed further against the accused and if the proceedings still continue further; it would be sheer harassment to the accused to undergo rigors of trial in the absence of any chance of conviction. Such case is fit case to use the powers of the court available under Section 482 of Code for to quash the criminal proceedings.
6. Legal position is stated in Devendra and Others V/s. State of Uttar Pradesh and another (2009) 7 SCC 495, the Apex court observed as under:-
"There is no dispute with regard to the aforementioned propositions of law. However, it is now well settled that the High Court ordinarily would exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure if the allegations made in the first information report, even if given face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, do not make out any offence. When the allegations made in the first information report or the evidences collected during investigation do not satisfy the ingredients of an offence, the superior courts would not encourage harassment of a person in a criminal court for nothing."
7. In Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujrath and another (2010) 8 SCC 628. It is observed thus by the Apex Court in para 12 and 13;
"12. In order to bring out an offence under Section 306, IPC specific abetment as contemplated by Section 107, IPC on the part of the accused with an intention to bring out the suicide of the concerned person as a result of that abetment is required. The intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this particular offence under Section 306, IPC. We are of the clear opinion that there is no question of there being any material for offence under Section 306, IPC either in the FIR or in the so-called suicide note.
13. It is absurd to even think that a superior officer like the appellant would intend to bring about suicide of his driver and, therefore, abet the offence. In fact, there is no nexus between the so called suicide (if at all it is one for which also there is no material on record) and any of the alleged acts on the part of the appellant. There is no proximity either. In the prosecution under Section 306, IPC, much more material is required. The Courts have to be extremely careful as the main person is not available for cross-examination by the appellant/accused. Unless, therefore, there is specific allegation and material of definite nature (not imaginary or inferential one), it would be hazardous to ask the appellant/accused to face the trial. A criminal trial is not exactly a pleasant experience. The person like the appellant in present case who is serving in a responsible post would certainly suffer great prejudice, were he to face prosecution on absurd allegations of irrelevant nature. In the similar circumstances, as reported in Netai Dutta v. State of W.B. [2005 (2) SCC 659], this Court had quashed the proceedings initiated against the accused."
The Apex Court cautioned the Courts trying offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. as the person who took his own life would not be available for cross examination to vouch for truth of contents of the suicide note. In the absence of the specific material to support the accusation it would be hazardous to make the accused to face and undergo the rituals of sessions trial which is not the pleasant experience for the accused. Baseless and irrelevant allegations can not be allowed to be used as a plank to prove the offence of abetment to suicide as made punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.
8. In Madhavrao Scindia V/s. Sambhajirav Aangre (1988) 1 SCC 692 it is observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and held that when a prosecution at the initial stage is asked to be quashed, the test to be applied by the court is as to whether the uncontroverted allegations, as made, prima facie establish the offence. It is also for the court to take into consideration any special features which appear in a particular case to determine whether it is expedient and in the interest of justice to permit a prosecution to continue. This is so on the basis that the court cannot be utilised as means to serve any oblique purpose and where in the opinion of the court chances of an ultimate conviction are bleak and, therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to continue, the court may while taking into consideration the special facts of a case also quash the proceeding even though allegations may be at a pre-chargesheet stage. In State of Haryana V/s. Bhajanlal 1992 (Suppl)1 SCC 335 seven categories are mentioned by the Apex Court to exercise powers under Section 482 the Cr.P. code read with the Article 226 of the Constitution of India;
a) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused;
(b) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code;
(c) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or 'complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused;
(d) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code;
(e) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused;
(f) where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party;
(g) where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.
9. Applying the tests as above and objective consideration of the material collected in the Charge-sheet do not make out the case against the Petitioners of commission of offences punishable under Section 306 and / or 384 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In such matters, there must be an allegation that the accused had instigated the deceased to commit suicide, or secondly, had engaged with some other person in a conspiracy, and lastly, that the accused had in any way aided in any act or illegal omission to bring about the suicide. The intention of the accused to aid or to instigate or to abet the deceased to commit suicide is a must for this specific offence punishable under Section 306 of IPC. In this case it can not be said that the Petitioners -accused intended to abet death or cause suicide of late Shri. Gopal Kale. Suicide note was at the most, in the nature of Departmental complaint and not the accusation of abetment and / or extortion . It revealed the mind of a psychic patient who underwent depression. Such an oversensitive person, who, decide to end his life and indeed lost it is an unfortunate sad event but the petitioners can not be blamed on that count in the absence of any material in the charge-sheet to disclose the essential ingredients of the offences alleged against the Petitioners. The Petitioners can not be connected with the charges even remotely because there is nothing to show that any of these Petitioners had aided, encouraged or assisted the deceased in any manner to commit suicide. Under section 306 IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no other option and this act or illegal omission must have been intended to push the deceased into such a ultimate position that he committed suicide. There is no such material to lay hands on in the present case.
Therefore the criminal proceedings against the Petitioners forest officials can not continue as it would not be reasonable, just and proper to make the Petitioners to undergo the rigor and ritual of a prolonged Criminal trial which will surely turn out to be an empty formality in the facts and circumstances of the case. Quashing the proceedings in the trial as against the Petitioners would serve the ends of justice as well as save the public time. The Petitions are allowed. Rule is therefore made absolute as prayed for.