SANDEEP MISHRA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner herein has filed this writ petition seeking quashment of F.I.R. No. 225/2019 dated 19/09/2019 registered at Police Station Newai, Durg for offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC which states inter alia that petitioner had a love affair with one Sonam Sharma for the last 6-­ 7 years and since, the petitioner instead of marrying Sonam Sharma, married with someone else, she committed suicide on 18/09/2019 by hanging herself from the ceiling fan using her own scarf, leaving behind a suicidal note alleging that she has committed suicide on account of the fact that petitioner promised to marry her but didn't and he has already married someone else. Pursuant to the F.I.R., the petitioner has filed this writ petition on the ground that taking the contents of the F.I.R. as it is, no offence is made out against him under Section 306 of the IPC, as such, the F.I.R. deserves to be quashed.

(2.) State of Chhattisgarh has filed separate return stating inter alia that on account of the fact that petitioner has been in a relationship with the deceased for the last 7 years and he promised her that he would marry her but did not do so, persuaded her to commit suicide and as per the suicidal note left behind by her, only and only the petitioner is responsible for her suicide. It was further submitted that the matter is still under investigation and the petition is absolutely premature.

(3.) Mr. Dhiraj Wankhede, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that taking the ingredients of the F.I.R. as it is, it cannot be held that the act of suicide was the last resort available to the deceased and there is no material available on record to frame charges against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC as there is no proximity and nexus between the conduct and behaviour of the petitioner with that of suicide committed by deceased Sonam Sharma and merely, because petitioner had some relation with the deceased, it cannot be the reason for committing suicide in terms of various decisions rendered by the Supreme Court including M.Mohan v. State represented by Deputy Superintendent of Police , (2011) 3 SCC 626 As such, in view of the fact that prima facie no case for continuing the prosecution is made out, the F.I.R. registered against the petitioner deserves to be quashed.