NIJALINGAPPA HOSAMANI S/O NAGAPPA HADAPAD Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA (SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION DHARWAD) REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the petitioners' counsel and learned HCGP for respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case is that the police have registered a UDR.No.11/2015 on 25.03.2015 at 1 p.m. under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. on the basis of the statement given by one Sri. Ulavappa, father of the deceased. The father of the deceased in his statement has alleged that his son deceased Basavaraj Hadapad married to one Smt. Veena in the year 2003 and there was no issues and she used to go to her parents house after quarreling and the said Smt. Veena had also filed a complaint before Mahila Police against the family members of the complainant and as a result, the deceased Basavaraj was very upset and that on 24.03.2015 at 8.30 p.m., the complainant had gone to his son-in-law's house. His deceased son was with his friends namely Lokesh and Swamy and the complainant was returned to home, his deceased son was not in the home and on 25.03.2015, the police had come to his house and informed that the dead body was lying on the highway, immediately, the complainant and others rushed to the spot and found the dead body of the deceased Basavaraj. The complainant was also shown face book message of the deceased contending 'happy ending dear all, thanks for everything' from the phone message, they also showed the death note of the deceased Basavaraj and further, news was also published in the newspaper making allegation of causing harassment to his wife and hence, he was upset, as a result, he took extreme step of committing suicide.

(3.) The petitioners who are accused Nos.5 and 6 working as Government servant and another is doing petty business and in their petition they have contended that there are no iota of materials against these petitioner to invoke Section 306 of IPC. Petitioner No.1 is a government employee living with his family and there are no specific events and dates on which day, the petitioners joined accused Nos.1 to 4 to quarrel with the deceased, and suicide note does not make out any case against these petitioners. There are no allegations against the petitioners that they have abetted the deceased to commit suicide and no allegation that they have instigated the deceased to commit suicide, hence, the ingredients of Section 306 of IPC does not attract against these petitioners. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.