1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.515-516 OF 2018

(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 6453-54 of 2015)

MUNSHIRAM …APPELLANT (S)

VERSUS

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR. ETC. …RESPONDENT (S)

J U D G M E N T

N. V. RAMANA, J.

1.Leave granted.

2.These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order,

2

dt. 15.04.2015, passed by the High Court of Judicature for

Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous

Petition Nos. 2372 of 2014 and 3508 of 2014, wherein the High

Court quashed the FIR No. 318 of 2013 filed under Section 306

of IPC.

3.Before we analyse the case at hand, it would be necessary to

observe the facts of this case which gave rise to the aforesaid FIR.

The deceased son of the Appellant herein (Brijesh Singh) got

married to Respondent no. 2 - wife (Khushboo) on 10.2.2008.

From the aforesaid wedlock, the couple were blessed with a male

child on 29.10.2009. It is to be noted that the wife on previous

occasions had filed multiple complaints against her husband

which were ultimately compromised. Moreover, the husband had

also filed a complaint dt. 13.7.2010 alleging atrocities committed

by her and her family on the deceased and his family. On

7.03.2013, Respondent- wife instituted another proceeding

against the deceased. It is alleged that the deceased was under a

constant fear of arrest and harassment because of false

implication in criminal case. Thereafter a compromise is said to

have been entered into between the deceased and the respondent

- wife, wherein he had promised not to repeat any of the

3

aforesaid occurrences. Thereafter, Respondent again filed an FIR

No. 152 of 2013 against the deceased and the Petitioner under

Sections 147, 323, 341 and 351 of IPC. It may not be out of

context to mention here that the Respondent - wife also filed a

domestic violence case against the deceased son of the appellant.

It is alleged that on 8.7.2013, due to continuous humiliation and

suffering inflicted upon by the wife and the accused persons, the

Appellant’s son (Brijesh Singh) committed suicide. Before

committing the suicide, the deceased is said to have written two

suicide notes which needs to be recorded herein.

Suicide Note 1

My wife Khushboo and his parents and family members since

after marriage are threatening me and my family saying that we

are dacoits and we will kill you and also have filed false cases of

dowry and domestic violence. My wife Khushboo has got an

illicit relation with Rajkumar the 2

nd

son of SI Gajadhar living

in her neighbourhood and Rajesh Aggarwal and son of Fawji

and others also keep on facilitating / helping them.

My wife, my in-laws and these boys are intending to grab the

factory and house of my parents, this is why they keep on

torturing us and do not allow me and my parents to meet my

son. Me and my parents are in deep agony since after my

marriage. The total investment in the factory is done by my

father and I have not contributed any penny. I love my wife and

my child very much but she do not have any affection either for

me and my parents so, her parents keep on threatening us and

keep on filing false complaint and are trying to grab the house

and factory by implicating my parents and my sister in false

cases (sic)

(redaction supplied)

Suicide Note 2

4

My wife Khushboo under the influence of Rajkumar the 2

nd

son

of SI Gajodhar living in her neighbourhood, Rajesh Aggarwal,

her parents and other in-laws has got filed a false case against

me, my parents and my sisters. Due to which I am in deep

mental stress. I am committing suicide. All these are conspiring

to grab the house and factory of my parents. My parents are old

and they may kindly be helped. The complete investment in the

factory is done by my father after his retirement. I do not have

any contribution in it. My wife wants to flee away to Delhi after

grabbing all these and every day she keeps abusing us and also

threatens to get us killed. She does not let us meet my son. I

have always loved my wife. She has always betrayed me. She

may be removed from the house of my parents. Safety of my

parents be ensured (sic)

(redaction supplied)

4.In this context an FIR was lodged by the appellant under Section

306 of IPC against the Respondent-wife and her family members

alleging that they harassed his son which ultimately lead to him

committing suicide.

5.On 11.03.2014, the Police reported to the trial court, wherein it

was stated that the suicide notes were found to be matching the

handwriting of the deceased as reported by forensic science

laboratory.

6.Aggrieved by the aforesaid FIR being registered against the

accused Respondents, they filed a petition under Section 482 of

CrPC before the High Court for quashing of the FIR No. 318 of

5

2013 for the offences of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of

IPC.

7.The High Court by the impugned judgment and order dt.

15.04.2015, quashed the aforesaid FIR on the ground that the

alleged offence of abetment of suicide was not made out in this

case. It would be relevant to note the reasoning of the High Court

before we further proceed with the discussion of this case:

a.That the Court was of the opinion that the suicide notes

makes reference to various litigation and criminal

complaints which were a result of actions of the deceased

and were not filed with a view to harass him.

b.The allegation concerning the adultery by the respondent -

wife has not been evidenced by any material on record.

c.The bad behaviour and alcoholism of the deceased has been

categorically admitted in the compromise affidavit.

d.That the allegations contained in the suicide note did not

reveal the ingredients of abetment or instigation of suicide.

e.That there is nothing to show the intention of the accused

to instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide.

f.That the suicide notes admit depression on the part of the

deceased so as to commit suicide.

8.Aggrieved by the impugned order, the father of the deceased

(appellant herein) approached this Court through this Special

Leave Petition.

9.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has

vehemently contended that the quashing of the FIR at the

6

threshold level without allowing the police to investigate the

matter cannot be sustained as it was pre-mature. He has further

relied on the status report as well as the FSL report to portray

that there was a prima facie case for continuing the investigation.

10.Per contra, the counsel on behalf of the respondents has

supported the impugned judgment and contended that the

suicide was the deceased’s own doing and the respondents in

both cases were beyond any blame as the litigation foisted upon

the deceased were solely attributable to his own actions and

behaviour.

11.Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and

perusing the material available on record we are of the opinion

that the High Court has prematurely quashed the FIR without

proper investigation being conducted by the Police. Further, it is

no more res integra that Section 482 of CrPC has to be utilized

cautiously while quashing the FIR. This court in a catena of

cases has quashed FIR only after it comes to a conclusion that

continuing investigation in such cases would only amount to

abuse of the process. In this case at hand, the court abridged the

investigation which needed to ascertain certain factual assertions

7

made in the FIR concerning the existence or non-existence of any

prior mental condition of the deceased prior to the commission of

suicide.

12.We are apprised of the FSL report which categorically states that

the handwriting of the deceased and the handwriting as present

in the suicide note has similarities. Further, the status report

filed before the High Court notes as under:

During investigation, after receiving information of the

deceased Brijesh Singh from the hospital and after recording

death FIR 15/13 under section 174 CrPC, investigation was

started. Handwriting was recovered from the place of incident

during inspection, which was identified by the complainant as

the handwriting of his son and same was taken into custody.

Statements under section 161 CrPC of complainant Munshi

Ram, witnesses Sh. Ajay Kumar, Hakam Singh, Smt. Ombati,

Smt. Rekha, Smt. Meena, Smt. Pushpa, and Sh. Sher Singh

were recorded. Thereafter, Munshi Ram got registered FIR No.

318/2013. The post-mortem and panchayatnama of the

deceased was done and during this, written unsigned note was

recovered from the half pant of the deceased and the same was

also taken into possession. The post-mortem of the dead body

of the victim was conducted. The clothes worn by the deceased

were taken into custody and the dead body was handed over to

the family members for last rites. On 3.8.2013, the file was

forwarded to Ld. ACC, Sadar for further investigation who sent

the suicide note to FSL for examination. Call details of the

suspect were obtained and on 17.2.2014, the main file was

entrusted to Ld. AACP, Vaishali Nagar. FSL Report with regard

to suicide note was obtained by him. On 18.2.2014, case file

was sent to Deputy Commissioner for further investigation who

took statements of Smt. Shrawni Devi, Smt. Vimla Devi, Smt.

Kalawati, Smt. Radha Agarwal, Smt. Manju Chowdhary, Shri

Deepakshi @ Charu, Shri Harish Agarwal under section 161

CrPC. Based on the investigation carried out as per the order

no 8225-27 of DCP in case no 318/13 by the Deputy

Commissioner and based on the evidence available on record, it

is established that Accused persons (1) Khushboo (2)

Dharampal (3) Smt. Sushila (4) Hawa Singh have committed

8

offence under section 306 IPC. Accused Smt. Khushboo W/o

Brijesh Singh D/o Dharampal Singh caste Bawaria, Age 25

years, Sushila W/o Shri Dharampal Singh caste Bawaria, Age

43 years and Dharampal Sing S/o late Shri Ram Singh caste

Bawaria, Age 45 years were arrested in this case.

Remaining enquiry.

Accused Hawa Singh could not be arrested since he was

absconding and since 8.8.2014, the Hon’ble High Court has

stayed the investigation.

The Status Report of facts is being sent to you.

(emphasis supplied)

13.In light of the fact that the enquiry was pending and there are

aspects which may require investigation, we are of the considered

opinion that the High Court erred in quashing the FIR at the

threshold itself without allowing the investigation to proceed. We

cannot agree with the reasons provided under the impugned

judgment concerning certain factual assertions made by the

Respondents as to the condition of the deceased and reasons for

committing suicide because acceptance of the said would not be

in consonance with the settled jurisprudence under Section 482

of CrPC as laid down by various judgments of this Court.

14.It would be relevant to note that any observation made herein

should not be taken as observations on merits and we direct the

investigative authority as well as the court to consider the matter

on its own merits uninfluenced by any observation herein.

9

15.Therefore, we set aside the impugned judgment and direct the

investigative authorities to complete the investigation with

promptness and to take it to its logical conclusion. Accordingly,

these appeals are allowed.

...……………………..J.

(N. V. RAMANA)

………………………..J.

(S. ABDUL NAZEER)

NEW DELHI

APRIL 09, 2018

10

ITEM NO.1501 COURT NO.9 SECTION II

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Criminal Appeal Nos.515-516/2018 @ Petition(s) for Special Leave to

Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 6453-6454/2015

MUNSHIRAM Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR. ETC. Respondent(s)

([ HEARD BY : HON. N.V. RAMANA AND HON. S. ABDUL NAZEER, JJ. ])

Date : 09-04-2018 These matters were called on for pronouncement of

judgment today.

For Petitioner(s)

Mr. Manish K. Bishnoi, AOR

Mr. Devansh Srivastava, Adv.

Ms. Ila Haldia, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR

Mr. Avinash Kumar, AOR

Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana pronounced the judgment of the

Bench comprising His Lordship and Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul

Nazeer.

Leave granted.

The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed reportable

judgment.

(SUKHBIR PAUL KAUR) (RENUKA SADANA)

AR CUM PS ASST.REGISTRAR

(Signed reportable judgment is placed on the file)