The Court quashed an FIR against two coaching teachers accused of abetting the suicide of a student named Unnati. Finding no allegations of instigation and a lack of proximity between the allegations and the suicide, the Court held the offence was not made out.
FIR Cr. No. 136/2017 and all proceedings quashed and set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(Judgment) (1) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.
Criminal Application No. 0033 of 2018
District : Dhule
Girish Bhaurao Salunke,
Age : 44 years,
Occupation : Private Coaching
Classes,.. Applicant
R/o. 63, Pramod Nagar, (Original accused
Sector-2, Deopur, Dhule. no.01)
versus
1.The State of Maharashtra.
2.Sanjay Vasant Mahale,
Age : 52 years,
Occupation : Secondary
Teacher,
R/o. 10, J.K. Nagar,.. Non-applicants
Nizampur, Taluka Sakri, (No.02 - Original
District Dhule. first informant)
...........
Mr. Joydeep Chatterji, Advocate, for the applicant.
Mr. K.S. Patil, Addl. Public Prosecutor, for non-applicant no.01.
Mr. U.A. Bhadgaonkar, Advocate, for non-applicant no.02.
...........
With
Criminal Application No. 0497 of 2018
District : Dhule
Narendra Gorakh Mahale,
Age : 35 years,
Occupation : Private Classes,
(Judgment) (2) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018
with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
R/o. 203, Animesh Apartment,.. Applicant
Rajguru Nagar, Walwadi, Deopur, (Original accused
Dhule, Taluka & Dist. Dhule. no.01)
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra, Through West Deopur Police Station, Dhule, Taluka & District Dhule.
2.Sanjay Vasant Mahale,
Age : 52 years,
Occupation : Teacher,
R/o. 10, J.K.Nagar,.. Non-applicants
Nizampur, Taluka Sakri, (No.02 - Original
District Dhule. informant)
...........
Mr. Babasaheb S. Bhale, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. K.S. Patil, Addl. Public Prosecutor, for non-applicant no.01.
Mr. U.A. Bhadgaonkar, Advocate, for non-applicant no.02.
...........
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE &
SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ.
DATE : 07TH MARCH 2018
JUDGMENT [Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.] :
01.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By
consent, heard finally.
02.Both these applicants have been filed for
quashing the first information report lodged at the
instanceofnon-applicantno.02bearing
(Judgment) (3) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
C.R.No.136/2017 registered with West Deopur Police
Station, Dhule, for offences punishable under
Sections 305, 306, read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code, Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes &
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989, and Section 4(i)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment
Act, 2015.
03.Both the applicants run coaching classes.
The applicant in criminal application no. 0033 of
2018 runs a coaching class by name, Sankalp Classes,
in which he deals with physics subject. He has eight
batches a day comprising of 60 boys and girls each.
The applicant in criminal application no. 0497 of
2018 runs coaching classes for NEET examinations and
he deals with chemistry subject.
04.Respondent no.02 - informant has lodged the
report stating that he resides at Nizampur, Taluka
Sakri, District Dhule. He himself is a teacher by
profession. His son takes education at Nashik in
engineering faculty. His daughter, Unnati, was aged
17 years and was taking education in XIIth standardin
Jaihind College at Dhule. Unnati was residing with
her friend Aakansha by taking premises on rent in
plot no. 18-A, Sector 2, Pramodnagar, Deopur, Dhule.
Unnati had joined the classes of Girish Salunke
(applicant in criminal application no. 033 of 2018)
for biology and the class of Narendra Mahale
(applicant in criminal application no. 0497 of 2018)
(Judgment) (4) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
for chemistry and she had also joined the class of
one Wadile for mathematics.
05. The FIR further disclosed, that on 27.11.2017 at about 10.30 a.m., when the informant was in the school at Nizampur, when he was working, Aakansha gave a phone call and told that Unnati is inside the house and she is not opening the door. All the friends were calling her but she is not opening the door and, therefore, he should give a phone call to Unnati and ask her to open the door. Thereafter, the informant gave call on mobile to Unnati but she could not pick up. Therefore, he gave phone call to one Satish Wagh, his distant relative, asked him to go to the room of Unnati and see what has happened. Thereafter, the informant and his wife started their journey to Dhule. Before they reached Dhule, they received phone call from Satish Wagh, stating that Unnati has committed suicide by hanging herself and the friends have opened the door and brought her back. She was admitted to hospital. The informant and his wife reached Dhule at about 01.30 p.m. His relatives had gathered there. They met Satish Wagh who told that Unnati had expired and her dead body has been kept in post mortem room. The informant and his wife saw the dead body and they saw the ligature mark.
06.The informant has further stated that though
Unnati had joined the class of applicant - Narendra
Mahale, she had stopped going to the class since
(Judgment) (5) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
about 15 days and, therefore, Narendra Mahale had
insulted her in the presence of boys and girls.
Narendra Mahale was not giving satisfactory replies
if Unnati had any difficulty in the academic subject.
He was also saying that he would not pass Unnati in
the examination. Applicant - Girish Salunke was also
insulting Unnati on one pretext or the other. Unnati
had complained the informant about the same
personally as was as on phone. At that time, the
informant had given an understanding to Unnati, not
to pay attention towards behaviour of Professors and
she should pay attention towards her studies. A day
before lodging the report i.e. on 26.11.2017 at 08.30
p.m., when the informant had made phone call to
Unnati for asking her diet and health, at that time
also, she made complaint to the informant about
insulting treatment being given by present
applicants, namely, Girish Salunke and Narendra
Mahale.
07. The FIR further disclosed, that the informant had identified the handwriting of Unnati in her notebook which was seized during panchanama made by police. In the written text therein, Unnati had stated about applicants Girish Salunke and Narendra Mahale, that "Girish Salunke sir speaks much more though he was not knowing anything about anybody. She was only knowing the trouble of soul, head, stomach and eyes. A girl had died because of them. They had made her to die. They had made her aware that she could not study if the class remained
(Judgment) (6) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
unattended by her. They must ask anybody, she had not spoken bad about them and admired their classes. They could have understood her being a girl. If a girl studying day and night, though not acknowledging the study, was told that she was never studying, she could bear the words only because applicants Girish Salunke and Narendra Mahale were her teachers" . The informant further stated, that due to the written text by Unnati, he became sure that Unnati was in trouble. The informant had also acknowledged from one Rashmi, that on 27.11.2017 in the morning, applicant Girish Salunke had insulted Unnati in class.
08.The informant further stated, that as Unnati
unattended the class of NEET examination conducted by
applicants Girish Salunke and Narendra Mahale, on
account of said anger in their mind, so also, knowing
well that Unnati was belonging to caste Chambhar,
applicants were insulting her in class from time to
time before others. The informant has complained
that due to annoyance at the instance of applicants
Girish Salunke and Narendra Mahale, on 27.11.2017 at
about 10.30 a.m., Unnati committed suicide by noosing
in the room where she was residing.
09.Both the Advocates appearing for the
respective applicants have submitted that even if the
allegations in the FIR are taken as it is, they do
not constitute offence punishable under Section 306
read with 34 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the
(Judgment) (7) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 [For short, "Atrocities Act"].
Both the applicants were teachers of the deceased and
they could not have contemplated death of the student
merely because she is of a particular caste.
Further, it has been submitted by the applicant in
criminal application no. 0497 of 2018, that he
himself by birth belongs to Scheduled Tribe category
and, therefore, the provisions of the Atrocities Act
are absolutely not attracted against him. The girl
had stopped the NEET class about 15 days prior to the
incident. Therefore, there was no proximity between
her death and the alleged instigation if at all to be
considered. It is also stated in the FIR, that
applicant Girish Salunke was insulting the deceased
on one or the other pretext but exact words have not
been stated even in the suicide note. If we consider
the contents of the suicide note which have been
reproduced in the FIR, it would show that the
applicants, who were the teachers of the deceased,
were more concerned about her study. If they would
have scolded the student for not doing their studies
or remaining absent for the tuition classes, then it
will not amount to any kind of instigation. The note
of all these facts were taken by this Court when the
bail applications filed by both the applicants i.e.
criminal application no. 0582 of 2017 and criminal
application no. 0585 of 2017 were decided on
19.12.2017.
10.Respondent no.02 has filed affidavit in
(Judgment) (8) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
reply which is nothing but the reproduction of the FIR. Taking into consideration those contents, it has been submitted on behalf of the respondents, that there is prima facie material against the present applicants. Unfortunately, a young girl has expired due to the insulting treatment given to her and, therefore, the FIR cannot be thrown away at this stage.
11.We have perused the FIR which also contains
the contents of suicide note allegedly written by
deceased Unnati. The contents of the said FIR,
including the suicide note, have been reproduced by
us in para nos. 05 and 06. We do not want to
reproduce it here but take the discussion further.
It appears that the only material for registering the
FIR is the suicide note and the alleged information
regarding the treatment given to Unnati by her
friends to the informant. Therefore, taking into
consideration this background, it is necessary to
consider whether the provisions of Section 107 of the
IPC, which relate to abetment of an act or a thing
are attracted. Even for invoking Section 305 or
Section 306 of the IPC, we will have to consider the
provisions of Section 107 of the IPC which runs as
follows :-
" Abetment of a thing .– A person abets the doing of a thing, who–
First .– Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly .– Engages with one or more other person or
(Judgment) (9) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or
Thirdly .– Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1 .– A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing.
Explanation 2 .– Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act. "
Thus, Section 107 of the IPC, which defines abetment
to mean that a person abets the doing of a thing, if
he firstly, instigates any person to do that thing;
or secondly, 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, and in order to the
doing of that thing; or thirdly, intentionally aids,
by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that
thing.
12. In the matter of Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P. [2002 SCC (Cri.) 1141] , when a quarrel had taken place between the appellant and deceased in which appellant was said to have told the deceased "to go and die" and the deceased found dead two days later, it has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court, that the suicide was not proximate to the quarrel though the deceased was named in the suicide note. It was also
(Judgment) (10) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
observed that the suicide was not the direct result
of the quarrel when the appellant used abusive
language and told the deceased "to go and die".
Here, in this case also, since when the applicants
were allegedly insulting deceased, has not been made
clear. As regards, applicant Narendra Mahale is
concerned, the deceased was not attending his class
since 15 days prior to the date of incident.
Therefore, there is absolutely no proximity. The
informant has not stated that just immediate prior to
the incident, he had come across a specific incident
of applicant Girish Salunke insulting deceased.
13. In the matter of S.S. Chheena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan & another [2010 ALL MR (Cri.) 3298 (S.C.)] , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held thus :-
" The word "suicide" in itself is nowhere defined in the Penal Code, however its meaning and import is well known and requires no explanation. "Sui" means "self" and "cide" means "killing", thus implying an act of self-killing. In short, a person committing suicide must commit it by himself, irrespective of the means employed by him in achieving his object of killing himself. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict a person 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 option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide. "
14. It is held by the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the judgment in the case of M. Mohan Vs. State represented by
(Judgment) (11) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018
with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
Deputy Superintendent of Police , reported in (2011) 3 SCC 326 , that abetment involves mental process of instigating or intentionally aiding a person for doing a thing. It is held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the said reported judgment, that there be a clear mens rea to commit an offence under Section 306 of the Penal Code which was involved in that case. In the instant case, we are concerned with Section 305 of the Penal Code as in the instant case, a girl aged 17 years had committed suicide. It is held in the case of M. Mohan (supra) that abetment would require the commission of a direct or active act by the accused which would lead the deceased to commit suicide, seeing no other option and such act must be intended to put the victim into a position that he commits suicide. In the instant case, there are no instances of instigation attributable to the applicant or even an allegation thereof.
15. Similar view has also been taken by this Court, Bench at Nagpur, in Criminal Application (APL) No. 364 of 2017, in the case of Amol s/o. Gulabrao Makode Vs. The State of Maharashtra & another , decided on 23.08.2017, wherein in the suicide note left by a boy of 14 years of age, he had named the applicant and others to be the responsible persons. However, taking note of the above said authorities and the legal position of law, the FIR has been quashed.
16.If we consider the contents of the suicide
(Judgment) (12) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018
with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
note allegedly left by Unnati, it is to be noted that both the applicants were concerned about the attendance of the students to the tuition classes. It also appears that the deceased was not sustaining the pressure of studies. She has not quoted any incidence of alleged insult. If the student is not attending the class and then if the teacher scolds her, it would be for the betterment of the student. Furthermore, it is also to be noted on the face of the record of the FIR, that she was not singled out by both the applicants. This Court while dealing with the bail applications of both the applicants, has made observations that it had gone through the contents of the suicide note and the statements given by many students of the class of Girish Salunke. Those statements were disclosing the general advice given by the teacher and it was for other students also. If a student when scolded for not completing study or absence from the tuition classes and then finds that it is insult, then it cannot be said that any act done by such student thereafter is the direct result of the scolding given by the teacher. Such scolding or words of advice are not synonymous to "incitement and instigation" . The words "incitement or instigation" would literally mean to provoke or urge or bring about the persuasion to do a thing. When such advice would be for the betterment of the career of the student, then there is clear absence of mens rea to commit offence either under Section 305 or Section 306 or Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, even if we accept the allegations
(Judgment) (13) Cri. Appln. No. 0033 of 2018 with Cri. Appln. No. 0497 of 2018
in the FIR on the face of record, it will not attract even prima facie the ingredients of the offences under which the FIR is lodged.
17.Hence, for the aforesaid reasons, the
criminal applications are required to be allowed and
the same are accordingly allowed.
The FIR registered as Crime No. 136/2017 at West
Deopur Police Station, District Dhule, for offences
punishable under Sections 305, 306, read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3(2)(v) of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, and Section 4(i)(r) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, against both the
applicants, so also, proceedings arising therefrom,
are hereby quashed and set aside.
Rule made absolute in the above terms.
...........
puranik / CRIAPPLN33.18etc
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR alleging instigation to suicide constitutes offence under Section 305/306 IPC and Atrocities Act.
Whether alleged scolding by teachers for absence from classes amounts to abetment of suicide under Section 107 IPC.
Whether there is proximity and clear mens rea to sustain abetment of suicide charges.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sanju @ Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P.Referred¶60
[2002 SCC (Cri.) 1141] · Who else cites this
S.S. Chheena Vs. Vijay Kumar Mahajan & anotherReferred¶63
[2010 ALL MR (Cri.) 3298 (S.C.)]
M. Mohan Vs. State represented by Deputy Superintendent of PoliceReferred¶65
(2011) 3 SCC 326 · Who else cites this
Amol s/o. Gulabrao Makode Vs. The State of Maharashtra & anotherReferred¶68
Criminal Application (APL) No. 364 of 2017
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Girish Bhaurao Salunke
Narendra Gorakh Mahale
The State of Maharashtra
Sanjay Vasant Mahale
Prasanna B. Varale
Vibha Kankanwadi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court