# Kusum Devi & Ors v. State of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2023) 4 ILRA 1246
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-03-20
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482. No. 3934 of 2023
- **Bench:** Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/kusum-devi-ors-v-state-of-u-p-anr-49855
- **Pages:** 11

## Headnote

A. Criminal Law-Application under Section
482 CrPC- summoning order and entire
proceedings- arising out of -section 306
IPC- challenged.

B. Section 306 IPC- Abetment of suicide-
Section 107 IPC- Abetment of a thing-
person charged of abetment- must gave
committed the act of abetment directly to
the deceased- suicide note in the instant
case- establishes- applicants by their acts-
continuous course of conduct- created a
situation- deceased perceiving no other
option except to commit suicide. (Paras 15
to 18)
HELD:
Perusal of the aforesaid suicide note as well as
the evidence available on record, this Court
finds substance in the contention raised by the
learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as
well as learned A.G.A. that prima facie case for
the alleged offence is made out against the
applicants. It is a clear case wherein the
applicants by their acts and by their continuous
course of conduct had created a situation which
led to the deceased perceiving no other option
except to commit suicide. Thus, the offence falls
within the four corners of Section 306 IPC. The
applicants had played an active role in forcing
the deceased to leave his job and he worked on
behalf of the license of his father, but only
minimal expenses for maintaining his wife and
child were given to him and eventually, the
property was also grabbed from him, therefore,
placed under these circumstances by the
applicant, the deceased had no other option but
to commit suicide. (Para15)

The question of mens rea on the part of the
accused in such cases would be examined with
reference to the actual acts and deeds of the
accused and if the acts and deeds are only of
such nature where the accused intended
nothing more than harassment or snap show of
anger, a particular case may fall short of the
offence of abetment of suicide. However, if the
accused kept on irritating or annoying the
deceased by words or deeds until the deceased
reacted or was provoked, a particular case may
be that of abetment of suicide. From the details
of suicide note, which was sent on the mobile
phone of the informant by her husband through
mobile phone of her father-in-law, prove the
compelling circumstances and continued act of
annoying the deceased, which can be inferred
as instigation/abetment to commit suicide. (Para
17)

In the judgment of Apex Court in the case of
Ude Singh vs. State of Haryana reported in
(2019) 17 SCC 301, it has been held that if
the accused by his acts and by his continuous
course of conduct creates a situation which
leads the deceased perceiving no other option
except to commit suicide, the case may fall
within the fourcorners of Section 306 IPC. (Para
18)

C. Non-bailable warrants not issued in
cursory manner- Court should properly
balance-
personal
liberty
and
social
interest before issuing warrants- proper
procedure followed. (Para 20)
Held:
It is on 20.12.2022, non-bailable warrants have
been issued after service of summons upon the
accused a

## Text

1246 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
----------
(2023) 4 ILRA 1246
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 20.03.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI
CHAUHAN, J.

Application U/S 482. No. 3934 of 2023

Kusum Devi & Ors. ...Applicants
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicants:
Sri
Sachin
Mishra,
Sri
Akash
Deep
Srivastava, Sri Ayush Mishra, Sri Bala Nath
Mishra, Sri Prabha Shanker Mishra, Sri Ram
Vishak Mishra

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
G.A., Sri Ved Prakash Shukla

A. Criminal Law-Application under Section
482 CrPC- summoning order and entire
proceedings- arising out of -section 306
IPC- challenged.

B. Section 306 IPC- Abetment of suicide-
Section 107 IPC- Abetment of a thing-
person charged of abetment- must gave
committed the act of abetment directly to
the deceased- suicide note in the instant
case- establishes- applicants by their acts-
continuous course of conduct- created a
situation- deceased perceiving no other
option except to commit suicide. (Paras 15
to 18)
HELD:
Perusal of the aforesaid suicide note as well as
the evidence available on record, this Court
finds substance in the contention raised by the
learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as
well as learned A.G.A. that prima facie case for
the alleged offence is made out against the
applicants. It is a clear case wherein the
applicants by their acts and by their continuous
course of conduct had created a situation which
led to the deceased perceiving no other option
except to commit suicide. Thus, the offence falls
within the four corners of Section 306 IPC. The
applicants had played an active role in forcing
the deceased to leave his job and he worked on
behalf of the license of his father, but only
minimal expenses for maintaining his wife and
child were given to him and eventually, the
property was also grabbed from him, therefore,
placed under these circumstances by the
applicant, the deceased had no other option but
to commit suicide. (Para15)

The question of mens rea on the part of the
accused in such cases would be examined with
reference to the actual acts and deeds of the
accused and if the acts and deeds are only of
such nature where the accused intended
nothing more than harassment or snap show of
anger, a particular case may fall short of the
offence of abetment of suicide. However, if the
accused kept on irritating or annoying the
deceased by words or deeds until the deceased
reacted or was provoked, a particular case may
be that of abetment of suicide. From the details
of suicide note, which was sent on the mobile
phone of the informant by her husband through
mobile phone of her father-in-law, prove the
compelling circumstances and continued act of
annoying the deceased, which can be inferred
as instigation/abetment to commit suicide. (Para
17)

In the judgment of Apex Court in the case of
Ude Singh vs. State of Haryana reported in
(2019) 17 SCC 301, it has been held that if
the accused by his acts and by his continuous
course of conduct creates a situation which
leads the deceased perceiving no other option
except to commit suicide, the case may fall
within the fourcorners of Section 306 IPC. (Para
18)

C. Non-bailable warrants not issued in
cursory manner- Court should properly
balance-
personal
liberty
and
social
interest before issuing warrants- proper
procedure followed. (Para 20)
Held:
It is on 20.12.2022, non-bailable warrants have
been issued after service of summons upon the
accused applicants, therefore, the 11 bailable
warrants as well as non-bailable warrants have
4 All. Kusum Devi & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1247
been issued following the guidelines in the case
of Inder Mohan Goswami (supra) wherein the
Apex Court has been held that the court should
properly balance both personal liberty and
societal interest before issuing warrants. There
cannot be any straight-jacket formula for
issuance of warrants but as a general rule,
unless an accused is charged with the
commission of an offence of a heinous crime
and it is feared that he is likely to tamper or
destroy the evidence or is likely to evade the
process of law, issuance of non-bailable
warrants should be avoided. (Para 20)

D. Whether appropriate to quash the
chargesheet under Section 482 CrPC-
stage- Magistrate has only issued process
against the applicants- evidence produced
by the accused in his defence cannot be
looked at this stage, except in very
exceptional
circumstances-
at
initial
stages of the criminal proceedings- prima
facie case is made out disclosing the
ingredients of offence alleged against the
accused-
the
Court
cannot
quash
a
criminal
proceeding-Application
dismissed. (Para 23)

Held:
This Court comes on the issue whether it is
appropriate for this Court being the Highest
Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section
482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge-sheet and the
proceedings at the stage when the Magistrate
has merely issued process against the applicants
and trial is to yet to come only on the
submission made by the learned counsel for the
applicants that present criminal case initiated by
opposite party no.2 are not only malicious but
also abuse of process of law. 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(s) alleged. Interference by the High
Court under Section 482 CrPC is to prevent the
abuse of process of any law or 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 clear from the law laid down
by the Apex 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. (Para 23)

Application dismissed. (E-14)

List of Cases cited:

1.Purushottam Chaudhary Vs C.B.I. decided on
27.02.2023

2.Inder Mohan Goswami & anr. Vs St. of
Uttranch. & ors. reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1

3.R.P. Kapoor Vs St. of Pun., AIR 1960 SC 866

4.St. of Har. Vs Bhajan Lal 1992 SCC (Criminal)
426

5.Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd.
Saraful Haq & anr., (para 10) 205 SCC (Criminal)
283

6. Mohd. Allauddin Vs St. of Bih., AIR 2019 SC
1910

7. Sakeer & ors. Vs. St. of U.P passed in
Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 13727 of
2006 decided on 06.03.2020

8. Ude Singh Vs St. of Hary. reported in (2019)
17 SCC 301

9.Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Vs St. of
Mah. reported in (2021) SCC OnLine 315

10. Shafiya Khan @ Shakuntala Prajapati Vs St.
of U.P., reported in (2022) 4 SCC 549

(Delivered by Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani
Chauhan, J.)

1. Instructions passed on by the
learned AGA today in the Court, is taken
on record.

2. Heard Mr. Prabha Shanker Mishra
and Mr. Akash Deep Srivastava , learned
counsel for the applicants, Mr. Ved Prakash
Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite
1248 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
party no.2, Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned
A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the
entire material available on record.

3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application
has been filed to quash the impugned
orders dated 02.09.2022 (summoning) and
18.01.2023 (NBW/82/83 Cr.P.C.) as well
as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case
No.75 of 2022 (State vs. Kusum Devi and
others), arising out of Case Crime No.75 of
2022, under Section 306 I.P.C., Charge
sheet No.216 of 2022, Police Station-Naini,
District-Prayagraj (Allahabad), pending in
the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Allahabad.

4. The brief facts as enumerated in the
application are as follows:-

i) An FIR has been lodged by
wife of the deceased, namely, Sunita
Mishra against as many as 5 named
accused on 19.02.2022 at about 13:48 hrs,
which was registered as Case Crime No.75
of 2022, under Section 306 IPC, P.S. Naini,
District-Prayagraj stating therein that the
opposite party no.2-Sunita Mishra w/o
Sundar Mishra is resident of House
No.115, Jawahar Nagar, Naini, Prayagraj.
The husband of opposite party no.2 was
working in Merchant Navy, however, when
he came to know about the illness of his
father, he came back to reside with his
father in the year 2019 and started doing
contract work in Nagar Nigam on license,
which was in favour of his father. The
informant/opposite party no.2 has five year
old daughter, therefore, father of the
deceased only provided expenses for their
livelihood. The informant's Jeth, namely,
Dinesh Mishra and Jethani, namely, Rani
Devi as well as the other Jeth, namely,
Manohar Mishra and mother-in-law of the
informant, namely, Kusum Devi used to
harass the informant for not having son and
passed remarks as to what she will do with
the money when she does not have any son.
When the informant requested for money
for education of her child, the aforesaid
persons stated as to what was the purpose
of educating her daughter. As the deceased
really loved his daughter as well as his wife
(the informant), therefore, he had sent his
wife and daughter to Ahmedabad for
purpose of educating his child. The
informant and her daughter had gone to
Ahmedabad for the aforesaid purpose on
26.12.2021, after which she was informed
through telephone by her husband that his
family members were exerting pressure
upon him to perform second marriage and
in case, he does not agree to do the same,
they would disown him from the entire
property. She was also informed by her
husband that her Jeth and Jethani were
persuading her father-in-law to disown her
husband and execute a will in their favour.
Taking advantage of illness of father-in-law
of the informant, who was suffering from
cancer since last one year and was confined
to bed, the brothers of the deceased
persuaded the informant's father-in-law and
influenced him to give the entire property
to them. She has also alleged that she was
informed by her husband (now deceased)
that on 05.01.2022 taking advantage of
illness of her father-in-law, the entire
property was taken by the brothers of the
deceased. Coming to know about the same,
her husband expressed that he does not
want to live any more. On the same day,
05.01.2022 at about 10:30 p.m., the
informant
received
the
Whats-app
messages from 9415613440 on her mobile
no.9723224428, which was a suicide note
of her husband. Being shocked by the
same, she tried to contact the family
members but they did not pickup the
phone. Being tensed, the informant left
4 All. Kusum Devi & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1249
Ahmedabad in the morning at 06:00 a.m.
and reached Prayagraj at the resident of the
applicants on 07.01.2022 and found that on
06.01.2022, the postmortem of the body of
the deceased (husband) had already been
conducted and the funeral took place on
07.01.2022, but no information was given
to the informant, nor anyone was ready to
disclose anything about the incident. After
the last rites (Terahvi) of her husband, the
behaviour of the family members including
the applicants was not proper, therefore,
apprehending some untoward incident and
due to fear, the informant went to
Ahmedabad. She has further alleged that
the applicants have instigated/abetted her
husband to commit suicide under such
circumstances where they were bothering
him by passing taunts and remarks of
disowning him from the property, under
such circumstances he was forced to
commit suicide. She was also suspecting
that her husband has been murdered and the
same has been given the shape of suicide,
therefore, whether it is the suicide by
abettement by the family members or after
murdering him, colour of suicide has been
given to the incident, can be well assessed
after
proper
inquiry,
therefore,
she
requested
that
the
inquiry
may
be
conducted. She further alleged that when
she came back from Ahmedabad, she was
not permitted to enter her house, hence, the
present case has been lodged.

ii) After investigation, the charge
sheet has been submitted on 27.07.2022
and the applicants have been summoned
vide order dated 02.09.2022 after which
bailable warrants have been issued on
07.12.2022 and finding service of summons
to be sufficient, non-bailable warrants have
been issued on 20.12.2022 after which on
non-appearance of the applicants, Nonbailable warrants alongwith proceedings
U/s 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. have been initiated
against the applicants. Hence the present
case has been filed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants
submits as under:-

i) the applicants are innocent and
have been falsely implicated in the present
frivolous case, which cannot be supported
by any evidence.

ii) the present FIR has been
lodged after a delay of about one month
and 14 days without giving any plausible
explanation for the same.

iii) the present FIR has been
lodged with false and frivolous allegation
with intention to get the property for which
a registered will has been executed by
father of the deceased in favour of motherin-law of the informant on 09.03.2023
mentioning therein that after the death of
Balram Mishra, name of Kusum Mishra be
mutated
in
the
revenue
records.
Subsequently, the Tehsildar passed the
order dated 15.10.2022 and mutated the
name of Kusum Mishra (mother-in-law of
the informant) in the revenue record.

iv) disputing the suicide note,
learned counsel for the applicants submits
that no suicide note was recovered from the
room of the deceased.

v) no offence under section 306
IPC is made out against the applicants as
there is noting on record to show that there
was abettment or instigation on the part of
the applicants due to which the deceased
committed suicide.

vi) relying upon the judgment of
this Court in the case of Purushottam
1250 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Chaudhary
vs.
Central
Bureau
of
Investigation thru. The Superintendent
decided on 27.02.2023 in Application U/s
482 No.1974 of 2023, learned counsel for
the applicants submits that non bailable
warrants should not be issued in a cursory
manner
and
the
order
regarding
proclamation U/s 82 & 83 CrPC should be
issued
only
on
the
application
of
proclamation supported by affidavit.

vii) he further submits that
issuance of non-bailable warrants should be
avoided unless accused is charged with
heinous offence or likely to destroy
evidence. In support of his contention, he
has relied upon the judgment of Apex
Court in the case of Inder Mohan
Goswami and another vs. State of
Uttaranchal and others reported in (2007)
12 SCC 1, in which the Apex Court has
held that the court should be extremely
careful
before
issuing
non-bailable
warrants as issuance of the warrants
involves interference with the personal
liberty.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants,
therefore, submitted that the present criminal
proceedings initiated against the applicant is
not only malicious but also amount to an
abuse of the process of the court of law. On
the cumulative strength of the aforesaid
submissions, it is submitted by learned
counsel for the applicant that the proceedings
of the above mentioned criminal case are
liable to be quashed by this Court.

7. On the other hand, Mr. Pankaj
Srivastava, learned AGA for the State as well
as Mr. Ved Prakash Shukla, learned counsel
for the opposite party no.2 has opposed the
submission made by the learned counsel for
the applicants and submitted that delay has
been well explained as the informant (wife of
the deceased) came to know about the
intention of the applicants after attending the
last rites ceremonies of her husband and
compelling
circumstances,
which
were
created by the applicants, she was left with no
other option but to lodge the FIR. In the FIR
itself, the explanation for delay is given. Even
otherwise, it is quite natural that lady, who
has lost her husband, will take time to
understand the situation and act accordingly.
It is admitted case of the applicants that the
FIR has been lodged due to property dispute,
hence it can be said that the circumstances
under which the deceased committed suicide
were nothing but the dispute regarding
property, which was grabbed by the brothers
of the deceased and the applicants had forced
the deceased to leave his job. Thus left with
nothing, he was placed in such circumstances
under which he committed suicide.

8. Learned AGA for the State as well as
learned counsel for the opposite party no.2
has further submitted that at the stage of
taking cognizance by the Magistrate as per
the provisions contained in Section 190(1)(b),
the concerned Magistrate has to see as to
whether prima facie case is being made out
against the applicants. In the instant case, the
concerned Magistrate has rightly taken
cognizance on 02.09.2022 on the basis of the
further investigation and other documents
collected
by
the
Investigating
Officer
including the statements of the witnesses. In
support of his contention, learned counsel has
relied upon the following judgments-

i. R.P. Kapoor vs. State of
Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866;

ii. State of Haryana vs. Bhajan
Lal 1992 SCC (Criminal) 426;

iii.
Zandu
Pharmaceutical
Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and
4 All. Kusum Devi & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1251
another, (para 10) 205 SCC (Criminal)
283;

iv. Mohd. Allauddin vs. State of
Bihar, AIR 2019 SC 1910;

v. Sakeer and others vs. State of
U.P. passed in Criminal Misc. Application
U/s 482 No. 13727 of 2006 decided on
06.03.2020.

9. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned
counsel for the opposite party no.2 further
submits that perusal of F.I.R. as well as
statements of the witnesses, goes to show
that, prima facie case for the alleged
offence is made out against the applicant.
Lastly, the learned A.G.A. states that this
High Court may not quash the entire
criminal proceedings under Section 482
Cr.P.C. at the pre-trial stage, for which he
has relied upon the judgment of the Apex
Court in the case of Mohd. Allauddin
Khan Vs. The State of Bihar & Others
reported in 2019 0 Supreme (SC) 454,
wherein the Apex Court has held that the
High
Court
had
no
jurisdiction
to
appreciate the evidence of the proceedings
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. because whether
there
are
contradictions
or/and
inconsistencies in the statements of the
witnesses is an essential issue relating to
appreciation of evidence and the same can
be gone into by the Judicial Magistrate
during trial when the entire evidence is
adduced by the parties. However, in the
present case the said stage is yet to come.

10. On the cumulative strength of the
aforesaid submissions, learned AGA for the
State as well as learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 states that this Court
may not exercise its inherent power under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the present case, and
hence the present application is liable to be
rejected.

11. I have considered the submissions
made by the learned counsel for the parties
and gone through the records of the present
application.

12. It would be appropriate to refer
Section 306 IPC, which reads as under:-

"306. Abetment of suicide.--If any
person commits suicide, whoever abets the
commission of such suicide, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to ten years, and shall
also be liable to fine."

13. In this context, it is also relevant to
refer to Section 107 IPC, which reads as
under:-

"107. 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 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.
1252 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

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."

14. Section 107 IPC, when read
carefully, requires that a person who is
charged for abetment of a thing must have
committed act of abetment directly to the
deceased. It is useful to refer the suicide
note of the deceased, which has been sent
in the mobile of informant from the mobile
number of the father of the deceased, which
is enumerated herein-below:-

"मै सुन्दर र्मश्रा s/o बलराम प्रसाद र्मश्रा अपनी
र्जन्दर्ी से तन्र् अपने पररिार िालो से मेरे आत्मित्या मे र्जमेदार
मेरे घर िाले िै मैने अपनी र्जन्दर्ी इनके नाम कर दी और मुझे इन्ि
लोर्ो ने िोखा र्दया इसके र्जमेदार घर के सिी लोर् िै मेरी पत्नी
और बेटी इन लोर्ो की िजि से अलर् िै अतः मेरी कानून से
प्राथिना िै र्क मेरा ईसाफ र्कया जाय और इन लोर्ो को इनकी कमो
की सजा दी जाये क्योर्क इन लोर्ो ने मेरी र्जन्दर्ी को तबाि कर
र्दया और जाब कर रिा था िो इन लोर्ो ने झु़ििा र्दया और अपने
फायदे के र्लये यूज कर र्लया अतः आप लोर्ो से र्निेदन िै र्क मेरे
साथ इन्साफ िो

मेरे पत्नी और बेटी का न्याय िो िार्क सारी साक्ष्य
और ररकार्डर्ं मेरी पत्नी देर्ी

आपका

सुन्दर र्मश्रा"

15. Perusal of the aforesaid suicide
note as well as the evidence availble on
record, this Court finds substance in the
contention raised by the learned counsel for
the opposite party no.2 as well as learned
A.G.A. that prima facie case for the alleged
offence is made out against the applicants.
It is a clear case wherein the applicants by
their acts and by their continuous course of
conduct had created a situation which led to
the deceased perceiving no other option
except to commit suicide. Thus, the offence
falls within the four corners of Section 306
IPC. The applicants had played an active
role in forcing the deceased to leave his job
and he worked on behalf of the license of
his father, but only minimal expenses for
maintaining his wife and child were given
to him and eventually, the property was
also grabbed from him, therefore, placed
under these circumstances by the applicant,
the deceased had no other option but to
commit suicide.

16. In the present case, the applicants
had by their acts or omission or by a
continued course of conduct created such
circumstances that the deceased was left
with no other option except to commit
suicide in which an instigation in the case
can be inferred.

17. The question of mens rea on the
part of the accused in such cases would be
examined with reference to the actual acts
and deeds of the accused and if the acts and
deeds are only of such nature where the
accused intended nothing more than
harassment or snap show of anger, a
particular case may fall short of the offence
of abetment of suicide. However, if the
accused kept on irritating or annoying the
deceased by words or deeds until the
deceased reacted or was provoked, a
particular case may be that of abetment of
suicide. From the details of suicide note,
which was sent on the mobile phone of the
informant by her husband through mobile
phone of her father-in-law, prove the
compelling circumstances and continued
act of annoying the deceased, which can be
inferred as instigation/abettment to commit
suicide.

18. In the judgment of Apex Court in
the case of Ude Singh vs. State of Haryana
4 All. Kusum Devi & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1253
reported in (2019) 17 SCC 301, it has been
held that if the accused by his acts and by
his continuous course of conduct creates a
situation
which
leads
the
deceased
perceiving no other option except to
commit suicide, the case may fall within
the four-corners of Section 306 IPC.

19. As regards the submission of
learned counsel for the applicants that nonbailable warrants have been issued in a
cursory manner, learned AGA as well as
counsel for the opposite party no.2 has
submitted that initially, an FIR was lodged
on 19.02.2022 and the applicants were
released on anticipatory bail by the court
below itself vide order 23.06.2022, which
was till submission of charge sheet. On
27.07.2022, the charge sheet was submitted
and cognizance was taken on 02.09.2022
and, thereafter, two dates, i.e. 04.10.2022
and 04.11.2022 were fixed for appearance
of the accused persons. Thereafter, on
07.12.2022, bailable warrants have been
issued against the applicants fixing date on
20.12.2022 for appearance. On 20.12.2022
also, when the applicants did not appear
before the court concerned, non-bailable
warrants have been issued against them
noting that service of summons were
sufficient upon the accused persons.
Subsequently, on 18.01.2023, non-bailable
warrants as well as the proceedings under
Section 82&83 Cr.P.C. have also been
initiated. After coming to know about the
charge sheet, the applicants have filed an
anticipatory bail application on 22.11.2022
before the concerned court, therefore, they
were well aware of the cognizance order as
well as the orders vide which date was
fixed for 07.12.2022 for appearance of the
accused. The aforesaid anticipatory bail
application was dismissed on 06.02.2023
and,
thereafter,
on
13.02.2023,
the
anticipatory bail application was filed
before this Court, which is still pending.

20. It is on 20.12.2022, non-bailable
warrants have been issued after service of
summons upon the accused applicants,
therefore, the bailable warrants as well as
non-bailable warrants have been issued
following the guidelines in the case of
Inder Mohan Goswami (supra) wherein the
Apex Court has been held that the court
should properly balance both personal
liberty and societal interest before issuing
warrants. There cannot be any straightjacket formula for issuance of warrants but
as a general rule, unless an accused is
charged with the commission of an offence
of a heinous crime and it is feared that he is
likely to tamper or destroy the evidence or
is likely to evade the process of law,
issuance of non-bailable warrants should be
avoided.

21. In the present case, inspite of
having knowledge of the cognizance
order on 22.11.2022, the anticipatory bail
application was moved before the court
below and when the applicants did not
appear, bailable warrants were issued on
07.12.2022 and noting that service upon
the applicants were sufficient, nonbailable
warrants
were
issued
and
subsequently, seeing that the applicants
are avoiding appearance before the court,
the proceedings U/s 82&83 CrPC were
initiated
by
the
court
concerned.
Therefore, it appears that the accused
applicants were watching the court
proceedings from outside and were
avoiding their appearance so that the trial
may not proceed further. There is no
report of moving any application for
initiation of proceedings U/s 82&83
Cr.P.C.
1254 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

22. From perusal of the instructions
passed on to the Court by learned AGA, it
is clear that in collusion with the police
officials, evidence regarding suicide note
was tempered and misplaced, therefore, on
the
application
moved
by
the
informant/complainant before the senior
officials, proper action has been taken
against the erring officials, who in
collusion with the applicants have tried to
tempered the evidence by misplacing the
suicide note, which was found in the pocket
of the deceased, when the concerned police
officials has reached at the place of
occurrence.

23. This Court comes on the issue
whether it is appropriate for this Court
being the Highest Court to exercise its
jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to
quash the charge-sheet and the proceedings
at the stage when the Magistrate has merely
issued process against the applicants and
trial is to yet to come only on the
submission made by the learned counsel for
the applicants that present criminal case
initiated by opposite party no.2 are not only
malicious but also abuse of process of law.
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(s) alleged. Interference by the High
Court under Section 482 CrPC is to prevent
the abuse of process of any law or 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 clear
from the law laid down by the Apex 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.

24. In the case of State of Haryana
Vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 AIR 604,
the Apex Court in paragraph 102 has
enumerated 7 categories of the cases where
power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be
exercised by this Court, which are quoted
below:-

"102. In the backdrop of the
interpretation of the various relevant
provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV
and of the principles of law enunciated by
this Court in a series of decisions relating
to the exercise of the extraordinary power
under Article 226 or the inherent powers
under Section 482 of the Code which we
have extracted and reproduced above, we
give the following categories of cases by
way of illustration wherein such power
could be exercised either to prevent abuse
of the process of any court or otherwise to
secure the ends of justice, though it may not
be possible to lay down any precise, clearly
defined and sufficiently channelised and
inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and
to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of
cases wherein such power should be
exercised.

(1) 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.

(2) Where the allegations in the
first
information
report
and
other
materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do
not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying
an
investigation
by
police
officers
under Section 156 (1) of the Code except
4 All. Kusum Devi & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1255
under an order of a Magistrate within the
purview of Section 155 (2) of the Code.

(3) 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.

(4) 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.

(5) 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.

(6) 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.

(7) 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."

25. The principles laid down by the
Apex Court in the aforesaid case, have
consistently been followed in the recent
judgement of three-Judge Bench of the
Apex Court in the case of Neeharika
Infrastructure (P) Ltd. vs. State of
Maharashtra reported in (2021) SCC
OnLine 315 wherein it has been held that
there is no denial of the fact that power
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but
as observed by this Court in catena of
decisions,
referred
to
hereinabove,
conferment of wide power requires the
court to be more cautious and it casts an
onerous and more diligent duty on the
court. Therefore, in exceptional cases,
when the High Court deems it fit, regard
being had to the parameters of quashing
and the self-restraint imposed by law, may
pass appropriate interim orders, as thought
apposite in law, however, the High Court
has to give brief reasons which will reflect
the application of mind by the court to the
relevant facts.

26. In recent relevant judgement of
the Apex Court in the case of Shafiya
Khan @ Shakuntala Prajapati vs. State of
U.P., reported in (2022) 4 SCC 549, it was
observed as under;-

"16. It is no doubt true that the
power of quashing of criminal proceedings
should be exercised very sparingly and
with circumspection and that too in rarest
of the rare cases and it was not justified for
the Court in embarking upon an enquiry as
to the reliability or genuineness or
otherwise of the allegations made in the
FIR or the complaint and that the inherent
powers do not confer any arbitrary
jurisdiction on the Court to act according
to its whims and fancies."
1256 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

27. In view of the aforesaid, this
Court finds that the submissions made by
the applicants' learned counsel call for
adjudication on pure questions of fact
which may adequately be adjudicated upon
only by the trial court and while doing so
even the submissions made on points of
law can also be more appropriately gone
into by the trial court in this case. This
Court does not deem it proper, and
therefore cannot be persuaded to have a
pre-trial before the actual trial begins. The
prayer for quashing the entire proceedings
is refused as I do not see any abuse of the
Court's process either.

28. In such a situation where the
applicants have instigated and created such
circumstances that the deceased was left
with no other option but to commit suicide
and perusal of the averments made in the
FIR as well as the statement of the
witnesses recorded by the I.O. and the
conduct of the applicants in a heinous
offence where a person had lost his life and
a special case where evidence is being
tempered for which action has already been
taken against the erring official, this Court
is of the opinion that the relief as prayed by
the applicants cannot be granted.

29. This Court, however, may clarify
that whatever is said in this judgment is
purely tentative and limited to the purpose
of judging the worth of the prayer to quash
proceedings as well as impugned orders. It
is and ought not be regarded by the Trial
Court as any kind of a comment or
evaluation about evidence, which is yet to
surface during trial. The truth of the
prosecution case has to be established
beyond doubt at the trial in accordance with
law. However, this Court is of opinion that
this is not a case, where the prosecution
ought to be scuttled at the threshold in the
exercise of powers under Section 482 of the
Code.

30. With the aforesaid observations,
the present application under Section 482
Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, dismissed.
----------
(2023) 4 ILRA 1256
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 14.03.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SHIV SHANKER PRASAD, J.

Application U/S 482. No. 5947 of 2023

Shailendra Singh ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Ramanand Gupta, Sri Harshit Gupta

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
G.A.

A. Criminal Law - Application under
Section 482 CrPC- order of revisional court
upholding the summoning order passed by
the
trial
court-
under
challenge-
proceedings arise out of complaint case
under Sections 420, 504 and 506 IPC-
issue of delay in filing the complainttransaction done in the capacity of an
employee of the company- no personal
liability.

B. Delay duly explained in the complaint
itself- entire prosecution story cannot be
disbelieved on the ground of delay- case is
not
of
civil
nature-incident
involves
criminality- applicant received Rs. 4 lakhs
in the name of his company for providing
land to the complainant-neither the land
was allotted nor the money was returned.
(Paras 13 and 14)

HELD: