DEENDAYAL PANT Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT petition is filed assailing the F.I.R. Case Crime No. 248 of 2014, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun. As per the contents of the F.I.R. Harish Godiyal (since deceased) got married with Rashmi Devi, daughter of the present petitioners on 24.06.2011; Rashmi Devi introduced Ijaz Khan to her husband Harish Godiyal as her Mooh Bola Bhai; however, later on Harish Godiyal came to know that Rashmi Devi in fact was having illicit relation with Ijaz Khan evern prior to their marriage; Harish Godiyal tried his level best to make Rashmi Devi understand not to have any illicit relation, however, Rashmi Devi did not stop; present petitioners also pressurized Harish Godiyal not to harass Rashmi Devi; thereafter, Harish Godiyal committed suicide and left the suicide note blaming the present petitioners as well as Ijaz Khan and Rashmi Devi responsible for his suicide.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that harassment howsoever high may be without there being any mens ria to derive Harish Godiyal to commit suicide would not amount to abatement or instigation as defined under Section 107 I.P.C. Therefore, no offence can be said to have been made out against the petitioners who are in -laws of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioners further stated that both the petitioners shall cooperate with the investigating agency, however, they should not be arrested during the investigation and their personal life and liberty should not be curtailed merely because they are named in the alleged suicide note and F.I.R. in view of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Joginder Kumar Vs. State of U.P., 1994 4 SCC 260.

(3.) I find prima facie force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners.