2020 (2) TMI 1461 - SC - Indian Laws

Suicide - harrasment - allegation is that unable to bear the torture Nilu along with her children Harisharan aged 1 years and Ramsharan aged 1 years committed suicide by jumping in front of a moving train - It was contended on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 3 before the High Court that the ingredients of Section 306 IPC have not been made out and the proceedings are liable to be quashed - HELD THAT - The High Court observed that the allegations made against Respondent Nos.1 to 3 at the most constitute an offence under Section 506 IPC for criminal intimidation. Read as a whole the allegations made against Respondent Nos.1 to 3 did not make out an offence under Section 306/34 IPC. The High Court further held that ingredients of Section 107 IPC are also not satisfied. In that view the petition filed by Respondent Nos.1-3 for quashing the criminal proceeding was allowed. It is no more res integra that exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC to quash a criminal proceeding is only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge sheet constitutes the ingredients of the offence/offences alleged. Interference by the High Court under Section 482 CrPC is to prevent the abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. It is settled law that the evidence produced by the accused in his defence cannot be looked into by the Court except in very exceptional circumstances at the initial stage of the criminal proceedings. It is trite law that the High Court cannot embark upon the appreciation of evidence while considering the petition filed under Section 482 CrPC for quashing criminal proceedings. It is clear from the law laid down by this Court that if a prima facie case is made out disclosing the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused the Court cannot quash a criminal proceeding. The conclusion of the High Court to quash the criminal proceedings is on the basis of its assessment of the statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC being wholly inadmissible in evidence cannot be taken into consideration by the Court while adjudicating a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Quashing of criminal proceeding under Section 482 of CrPC based on allegations of harassment leading to suicide - Assessment of statements under Section 161 CrPC - Applicability of Section 306 IPC and Section 107 IPC - Admissibility of witness statements under Section 161 CrPC in quashing criminal proceedings.

Analysis:
The Supreme Court dealt with an appeal challenging the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, where a criminal proceeding against certain respondents was quashed under Section 482 of the CrPC. The case involved allegations of harassment leading to the suicide of the appellant's wife and children. The High Court held that the allegations did not amount to an offense under Section 306 IPC or Section 107 IPC, and thus allowed the petition for quashing the criminal proceedings.

Upon review, the Supreme Court emphasized that the power to quash a criminal proceeding under Section 482 CrPC is only applicable when the allegations in the FIR or charge sheet establish the ingredients of the alleged offense. The Court clarified that the High Court cannot delve into the appreciation of evidence while considering a petition under Section 482 CrPC and must ensure that a prima facie case disclosing the offense's ingredients is made out to proceed with a criminal trial.

The respondents argued that the allegations only indicated harassment and did not establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC or Section 107 IPC. However, the Supreme Court disagreed, noting that the High Court's decision to quash the proceedings relied on witness statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC, which are inadmissible as evidence. The Court cited precedent to support the inadmissibility of such statements in the context of quashing criminal proceedings.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court highlighted that the High Court erred in assessing the statements under Section 161 CrPC, as one witness mentioned the deceased's intent to commit suicide due to the harassment by the respondents. The Court concluded that the High Court prematurely quashed the proceedings, depriving the respondents of a fair trial to establish their innocence. Therefore, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of a full-fledged trial to determine the truth in such cases.