BALUBHAI TAKHAJI JADEJA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS are the original accused in 1st Cr.No. 3035 of 2000 registered with Rapar Police Station on 14th June, 2000, by one Shri Manharlal Soni. The original complainant lodged the complaint u/s. 306 of the Act was added on 21st June, 2000. According to the prosecution, daughter of the deceased was divorced within 6 months of her marriage and two days prior to date of incidence, the accused had demanded sum of Rs.75,000.00 as the cost of divorce. As they continue to threaten for money from the deceased. He attempted suicide on 14.6.2000 on account of mental torture and harassment on 14th June, 2000 and passed away on 15th June, 2000.

(2.) A complaint was registered against the present petitioner-original accused and after due investigation the charge-sheet was filed against them and on the matter being committed to the Court of Sessions, the same was registered as Sessions Case No.68 of 2000. Petitioners moved different applications for discharge and after hearing both the sides, these applications were dismissed vide its order dated 26th April, 2007. The impugned order is challenged by way of present petition by raising various grounds for such challenge. At the outset there is need to reproduce the provision of Section 227 of Criminal Procedure Code relating to discharge observed as under: 227. Discharge - If, upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith, and after hearing the submissions of the accused and the prosecution in this behalf, the Judge considers that there is not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons for so doing . Law in respect of discharge is very well laid down by the Apex Court in various authorities and one such is reproduced here:-

(3.) FURTHER reliance is placed on the judgement of Apex Court in case of DILAWAR BALU KURANE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA REPORTED IN 2002(2) SCC 135, wherein also the ratio laid down in case of Prafull Kumar Samal (Supra) followed. It is also urged further urged that the deceased committed suicide after three days of alleged incident of demanding money or giving threat that would not constitute of any ingredient of instigation and the presence of menas rea since is, necessary concomitant of instigation. It would not be possible to held that the suicide would direct result of alleged demand or threat . Furthermore, it has been argued that the ingredients of abatement are completely missing in the charge-sheet and even if the material adduced with the charge-sheet indicate that disputes in the family were on account of divorce and that had nothing to do with any alleged demand prior to the commission of suicide. Further reliance is placed on the judgment of Apex Court in case of Sanju alias SANJAY SINGH SENGAR VS. STATE OF M.P. REPORTED IN AIR 2002 SC 1998, where the appellant had told the deceased to go and die and that also was not held to have constituted of ingredients of instigation.