Allowed

Pandurang Ganpatrao Burkule and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC10 Oct 2013REVN/164/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the proceedings against accused persons in a case under Section 306 IPC. The court held that allegations of torture and suicide failed to establish the necessary intent or reasonable foresight of suicide to constitute abetment under Section 306 IPC, and noted the absence of medical evidence confirming suicide by poisoning.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in Writ Petition No. 855/2013 and Revision Application No. 164/2013 quashed and allowed.

Pandurang Ganpatrao Burkule and Others Vs the State… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

1 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 855 OF 2013

¶4

SURESH RAMLU AULWAR age 36 years, Occ. Service, R/o Bhagyanagar, Nanded. Dist. Nanded. 2. Datta s/o Haseppa Kaitwad, age 46 years, Occ. Service, R/o Snehnagar, Police colony, Nanded, Dist. Nanded. Petitioners . VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Through Himayatnagar Police Station, Nanded, Dist. Nanded. 2. Mandabai w/o late Sambhaji Patil, age 34 years, Occ. Household, R/o Pathrad, Tq. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded. At present R/o Near Zilla Parishad, High School, Himayatnagar, Nanded, Dist. Nanded. Respondents .

¶5

Mr. M.V.Ghatge a/w Mr. B.N.Gadegaonkar, Advocate for Petitioners Mr. P.N.Muley, APP for Respondent no.1. Mr. H.M.Shaikh advocate for respondent No.2.

¶6

WITH

¶7

2 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶8

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 164 OF 2013

¶9

1.	PANDURANG GANPATRAO BURKULE age 59 years, Occ. Pensioner, R/o Himayatnagar, Tq. Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded.
2.	Datta s/o Gyanoba Narwade, age 55 years, Occ. Service as Talathi, Tahsil Office, Kinwat, Tq. Kinwat, Dist. Nanded.
3.	Mohd. Azimoddin s/o Mohd. Bashiroddin, age 53 years, Occ. Service as Circle Inspector, Tahsil Office, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded.	Applicants
	VERSUS
1.	THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Through Police Station, Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded. Copy to be served on PP High Court of Bombay Bench At Aurangabad.
2.	Mandabai w/o Sambhaji Patil, age 34 years, Occ. Household, R/o Himayatnagar, Near Z.P., High School, Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded.	Respondents.
Mr. Mr. Mr.	... U.B. Bilolikar, advocate for the applicants. G.R.Ingole, APP for respondent no.1-state H.M.Shaikh Advocate for respondent no.2

¶10

CORAM : ABAY M. THIPSAY, J. Dated : October 10, 2013

¶11

3 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶12

ORAL JUDGMENT :-

¶13

This writ petition and the revision application both can be conveniently decided by this common judgment, as both the matters arise out of Sessions Case No.1/2011, pending before the Sessions Court, at Bhokar Dist Nanded.

¶14

The applicants in the revision application, as also the petitioners in the writ petition, are accused in the said case. The allegations against them are that they have committed an offence punishable under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants had applied for discharge before the Sessions Court, but their application for discharge was rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded. Being aggrieved thereby, the accused persons have approached this Court by filing above two separate proceedings.

¶15

The Revision application No.164/2013 was admitted on 5.9.2013 and was peremptorily fixed for final hearing today. In the writ petition Rule is issued making it returnable forthwith and by consent, the Writ Petition is also heard finally, along with the revision application.

¶16

One Sambhaji Patil, working as a Talathi in the revenue Department, committed suicide on 3.4.2008, supposedly by consuming some poisonous substance. In the inquest panchnama, a suicide note, supposed to have been written by him, was found. In the suicide note, he had mentioned the

¶17

4 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶18

names of the applicants/petitioners and stated that he was committing suicide because of the torments caused to him by those persons, and that those persons were responsible for his suicide. He also mentioned in the suicide note that an amount of Rs.75,000/- withdrawn by him from his G.P.F. account, was lying with Mr. Chechare, a clerk in the revenue department.

¶19

On 4.4.2008 Smt. Mandabai, wife of Sambhaji Patil, lodged a report to police alleging that Sambhaji Patil had committed suicide because of the torture caused to him by the applicants/petitioners. She identified the handwriting and signature on the suicide note.

¶20

On this, a case in respect of an offence punishable u/s 306 of the IPC read with Section 34 of the IPC was registered and investigation commenced. After investigation, police filed a charge sheet against the applicants/petitioners.

¶21

I have heard Mr U.B.Bilolikar, the learned counsel for the applicants in Revision Application and Mr. M.V.Ghatge, the learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ Petition. I have also heard Mr. P.N.Muley and Mr. G.R.Ingole, the learned Additional Public Prosecutors for the respondent – State. I have also heard Mr. H.M.Shaikh, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 i.e. the first informant.

¶22

Before considering whether any case of an offence punishable u/s 306 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against any of the applicants/petitioners, some preliminary aspects of the matter may be

¶23

5 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶24

examined. The first aspect of the matter which needs to be noted is that, there is no medical opinion available as to the cause of death of Sambhaji Patil. In the postmortem examination, the same could not be revealed and no opinion about the cause of death has been given by the Doctor performing postmortem examination. The viscera was preserved and sent to Chemical Analyzer for analysis. After analysis, the C.A. did not find any poison in the viscera. Thus, what is the cause of death of Sambhaji Patil is not clear at this stage.

¶25

The second aspect of the matter is that, though the statements recorded during the investigation indicate that the deceased had purchased poison from one Ramrao Suryawanshi, no poison, or any bottle or any container in which such poison was kept, was recovered in the investigation.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the applicants have a different version as to why Sambhaji Patil would have possibly committed suicide, if at all he committed suicide. According to them, Sambhaji Patil had collected some amount towards the land revenue, but instead of depositing the same in the office, he had mis-appropriated those amounts. That, therefore, he was required to take a loan from his G.P.F. account for depositing the said amounts and was therefore depressed. It is also submitted that Sambhaji Patil was facing some prosecution as a result of a complaint lodged by one Jyoti Suresh Aulwar, who is the wife of respondent no.1 in Writ Petition No.855/2013. The substance of these contentions is that, Sambhaji Patil had landed himself in difficult situation and that, therefore, he

¶27

6 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶28

might have committed suicide for which the petitioners/applicants cannot be held responsible.

¶29

The learned counsel for respondent no.2, on the other hand, made certain submissions suggesting that, the petitioners/applicants were clearly responsible for the death of Sambhaji Patil and that, he had committed suicide because he has harassed and tortured by them.

¶30

Indeed, some support to the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners/applicants is found from the version in the FIR itself. However, in my opinion, the crucial aspect of the matter does not depend on the evaluation – although prima facie – of the reliability of the facts asserted in the police report and accompanying documents. The crucial aspect is, whether the facts asserted disclose the commission of offence punishable u/s 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶31

The ‘facts of the case’ as found in the printed prescribed proforma of the final report form are as under :-

¶32

That, the accused nos.1, 2 and 3 insisted that
the deceased Sambhaji Patil should deposit the
amount of Rs.60,000/- towards the recovery of
revenue before the year ending and by
continuously troubling for such deposit tortured
him mentally. That, accused nos.4 and 5 by
making a complaint against said Sambhaji Patil
had caused him mental torture and therefore, all
the accused persons had been responsible for the
death of Sambhaji Patil.(Emphasis supplied)

¶33

7 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶34

In the First Information Report, Mandabai alleges that since her husband was tortured by the applicants/petitioners and was instigated by them, he had committed suicide by consuming something, the petitioners/applicants are responsible for his suicide.

¶35

In my opinion, these allegations fall short of attracting the ingredients of an offence punishable u/s 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶36

This Court had an occasion to consider as to ‘when a person can be said to have abetted the commission of suicide by another’ on a number of occasions. Reference may be made only to one of them. In Criminal Writ Petition No.1113/2011 decided on 26.4.2012, in the case of Shivaji Shitole and others Versus State of Maharashtra and another, [ 2012 (4) Mh.L.J. (Cri.) 30] , after noting the concept of abetment of an offence and authoritative pronouncements of various High Courts and also of the Supreme Court of India in the following cases : -

¶37

I] Manish Kumar Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan (1995 Cri.
Law Journal 3066 ).

¶38

II] Vedprakash Bhaiji Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (1995 Cri.Law Journal 893)

¶39

III] Sanju alias Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2002 Criminal Law Journal 2796)

¶40

IV] Cyriac, S/o Devassia and another Vs. Sub-Inspector of Police, Kaduthuruthy and another (2005 Criminal Law Journal 4322) (Kerala High Court)

¶41

V] Madan Mohan Singh Vs. State of Gujarat (2010) 8 Supreme Court Cases 628 .

¶42

VI] Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Chattisgarh (2001 Criminal Law Journal 4724)

¶43

8 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶44

the legal position was summarized in the aforesaid judgment as

¶45

under :-

¶46

.Even if a person would commit suicide
because of the torments of an accused,
the accused cannot be said to have
abetted the commission of suicide by the
deceased, unless the accused would
intend, while causing torments to the
victim/deceased, that he should commit
suicide. Even if the rigour of this
proposition is diluted, still, the least
that would be required is, that it
should be shown that the accused could
reasonably foresee that because of his
conduct, the victim was almost certain-
or at least quite likely-to commit
suicide. Unless that the victim should
commit suicide, is either intended, or
can be reasonably foreseen and expected
a person cannot be charged of having
abetted the commission of suicide, even
if the suicide has been committed as a
result of some of the acts committed by
the accused. A perusal of the reported
judgments show that even in cases where
the accused had uttered the words such
as “go and die”, in abusive and
humiliating language, which, allegedly,
led to the committing of suicide, it was
held that it would not amount to
instigation and that consequently, there
would be no offence of abetment of
suicide.

¶47

It is nobody’s case that the petitioners/applicants intended that Sambhaji Patil should commit suicide. In fact, the possibility of Sambhaji Patil being depressed because of the personal problems faced by him cannot be overlooked from the material collected during the investigation. In any case,

¶48

9 wp855 & rev 164.13

¶49

even if it is accepted that Sambhaji Patil indeed committed suicide because of the torments caused to him by the petitioners/applicants, the petitioners, for that reason, cannot be said to have abetted to commission of suicide by him.

¶50

The prosecution of the petitioners/applicants therefore suffers from a fundamental defect. It does not spell out any offence punishable u/s 306 of the Indian Penal Code. Such proceedings, therefore, cannot be permitted to be continued.

¶51

The learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submitted before me that, the case of Mandabai - widow of Sambhaji Patil, should be considered favorably and expeditiously by the concerned authorities of revenue department for providing employment to her, or to her elder son, on compassionate ground. Indeed, there are schemes for employment on compassionate ground meant for the welfare of the family members of the Government servants who die while in service. It cannot be ignored that, death of Sambhaji Patil has been sudden and has been attributed to certain happenings at his work place. Though I hold that the petitioners/applicants cannot be prosecuted with respect to an offence punishable u/s 306 of the IPC, the fact remains that suicidal death of Sambhaji Patil appears to have some connection with the happenings at his work place. In this view of the matter, the concerned authorities are expected to consider the case of Mandabai and/or her son, or any other eligible member of the family of Sambhaji Patil, for appointment on compassionate ground.

¶52