Allowed

Manuja K D/O. Kenchappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Sept 2024CRL.P/101826/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners accused under Section 306 r/w 149 IPC after the husband of accused No.1 committed suicide days after being told to 'go and die'. Holding mere such words without mens rea or continued conduct do not constitute instigation, the High Court quashed the pending proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings against petitioners in C.C.No.208/2024 pending before Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoovina Hadagali quashed.

Manuja K D/O. Kenchappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101826 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MANUJA K. D/O. KENCHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: KALKERE VILLAGE, TQ: HOSADURGA, DIST. CHITRADURGA-560083.

¶8

SMT. TANUJA K. ALIAS TANU W/O. NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HOLAKERER, DIST: CHITRADURGA-577526.

¶9

SMT. SHIVAKKA ALIAS SHIVAMMA H. W/O. SIDDAYYA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: SUJIKALLU VILLAGE, TQ: HOSADURGA, DIST: CHITRADURGA - 577542.

¶10

KENCHAPPA S/O. SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KALKERE VILLAGE, TQ: HOSADURGA, DIST: CHITRADURGA - 560083.

¶11

YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR

¶12

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

RAMAPPA S/O. LATE. HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KALKERE VILLAGE, TQ: HOSADURGA, DIST: CHITRADURGA – 560083.

¶14

AJJAIAH G. ALIAS AJAY S/O. VIRUPAKSHAPPA G, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. BANAVIKALLU VILLAGE, TQ: KUDLIGI, DIST: VIJAYANAGAR - 583126.

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. AMAREGOUDA M., ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, HIREHADAGALI POLICE STATION, R/BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶21

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011.

¶22

NAGAPPA S/O. BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: HYARADA VILLAGE, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST: VIJAYANAGAR - 583217.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; R2-SERVED)

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3 AND 5 TO 7 CRIME NO.182/2022 (HIREHADAGALI POLICE STATION DATED 03.12.2022) ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HOOVINA HADAGLI, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 306 R/W 149 OF IPC, IN CC NO.208/2024 THE ORDER SHEET IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶26

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5 to 7

¶30

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.208/2024 pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Hoovina Hadagli registered for the offences punishable under Section 306 r/w Section 149 of IPC.

¶31

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶32

Respondent No.2 has filed a complaint on 03.12.2022 and the same came to be registered in Hirehadagali P.S Crime No.182/2022 for offences punishable under Section 306 r/w Section 149 of IPC against the petitioners. The Police after investigation, filed a chargesheet against the petitioners for the said offence. Based on the chargesheet, a case came to be registered against the petitioners in C.C.No.208/2024 for offences under Section 306 r/w Section 149 of IPC and it is pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Hoovina Hadagali. The proceedings of the said criminal case are sought to be quashed in the present petition.

¶33

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State. Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and unrepresented.

¶34

Learned counsel for petitioners would contend

¶35

that the marriage of the deceased Basavaraj and accused No.1 is a love marriage and both were aged 19 years as

¶36

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶37

on the date of their marriage. The mother of accused No.1-Ratnamma has filed a missing complaint regarding missing of accused No.1 on 19.10.2022. It is alleged in the complaint that on 28.11.2022, when accused No.2 to 7 went to the house of deceased and when they were bringing back accused No.1, at that time, accused No.1 and other accused told deceased Basavaraj to “go and die” and thereafter he has committed suicide on 03.12.2022. He contend that mere saying “go and die” does not attract the offence under Section 306 of IPC. On that point, he placed reliance on the decision of this Court rendered in Crl.A.No.65/2012 and Crl.P.No.101905/2023. He contends that even the death note does not indicate how the petitioners are responsible for the death of deceased. On that point, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Prabhat Kumar Mishra @ Prabhat Mishra V/s State of Uttar Pradesh and Another¹ . He contends that the deceased was sensitive as

¶38

1 2024 AIAR (Criminal) 341

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶40

his wife was taken by her parents, he was depressed and he committed suicide. The committal of suicide is not due to the abetment. On these grounds, he prayed to quash the proceedings registered against the petitioners.

¶41

Learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that death note found to be in the hand writing of the deceased, wherein, it is stated that the petitioners are responsible for the death of the deceased. She contends that the deceased used to talk with accused No.1 over phone from 28.11.2022 regularly and call records reveal the said aspect. It indicates that constantly the accused No.1 was abating the deceased to commit suicide. The chargesheet materials show prima facie case against the petitioners for offence under Section 306 of IPC. With this she prayed to dismiss the petition.

¶42

Having heard learned counsels, the Court has

¶43

perused the chargesheet material and other materials placed on record.

¶44

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶45

The marriage of the deceased Basavaraj with

¶46

accused No.1 was a love marriage. The accused No.1 ran away from the house and in that regard her mother Ratnamma has filed a complaint on 19.10.2022. Thereafter, the deceased Basavaraj is stated to have married accused No.1 and both were residing in his house. On coming to know, the petitioners who are accused Nos.2 to 7 went to the house of deceased on 28.11.2022 to bring back accused No.1. At that time, it is alleged that accused No.1 who is wife of deceased told the deceased that she is not ready to reside with him and asked him to “go and die” and so also the other petitioners also stated to the deceased to “go and die”. The said incident has taken place on 28.11.2022 and thereafter, the deceased has committed suicide on 03.12.2022. The suicide is not immediate to the date to the incident. The suicide is after 5 days of the said incident dated 28.11.2022. Merely asking a person to “go and die” does not amount to abetment to commit suicide. Considering the Apex Court

¶47

¶48

NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶49

decision, this Court in Crl.A.65/2012 has observed as

¶50

under:

¶51

“24. The appellant-accused telling the deceased to go and die itself does not constitute the ingredient of instigation. In the case of Sanju alias Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P. reported in 2002 Crl.L.J. 2796 it is held that the quarrel between the accused and deceased and the accused telling the deceased to go and die, that itself would not constitute ingredient of instigation. The presence of mens rea is necessary concomitant of instigation. The appellantaccused merely quarrelling with the deceased-Harini, abusing her, asking her to die does not amount to abetment as there is no mens rea on the part of the appellant-accused to drive out the deceased to commit suicide. The appellant- accused should have knowledge or intention that the deceased will commit suicide. On looking to the averments of the complaint Ex.P.1 and evidence of P.W.1 to P.W.3 there is no allegation that appellant-accused had knowledge or

¶52

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶53

intention to the effect that the deceasedHarini will commit suicide.

¶54

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Indrajit Kundu and others, Crl. A. No.2181/2009 has observed as under:

¶55

"16. The judgment relied on by learned counsel for the State in the case of Chitresh Kumar Chopra vs. State (NCT) of Delhi, 2009 (16) SCC 605 this Court has held that where the accused by his acts or by a continued course of conduct creates such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide, an "instigation" may be inferred. To draw the inference of instigation it all depends on facts and circumstances of the case, whether the acts committed by the accused will constitute direct or indirect act of incitement to the commission of suicide is a matter which is required to be considered in facts and

¶56

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶57

circumstances of each case. As such we are of the view that the judgments relied on by the learned counsel for the State would not assist in supporting his arguments.”

¶58

A word uttered in a fit of anger or emotion

¶59

without intending the consequences to actually follow, cannot be said to be instigation.

¶60

Where the accused by his acts or by continued course of conduct creates such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide and instigation may be inferred. In the case on hand, there is no continued course of conduct of the petitioners which created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide.

¶61

A person may attempt to commit suicide due to

¶62

various reasons such as depression, financial difficulties, disappointment in love, tired of domestic worries, acute or

¶63

10 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:12967 CRL.P No. 101826 of 2024

¶64

chronic ailments and so on and need not be due to abetment. The same has been observed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mangat Ram V/s State of Haryana² .

¶65

The marriage of deceased Basavaraj with

¶66

accused No.1 was a love marriage and as accused No.1 was taken by the other accused persons to their house, it appears that the deceased was upset and he has committed suicide. Even, the death note stated to be in the hand writing of the deceased, there is no specific allegation against the petitioners as to how they are responsible for his death. Considering all these aspects, the proceedings against the petitioners is abuse of process of law.

¶67

12. In the result, the following:

¶68

ORDER

¶69

i. The petition is allowed.

¶70