LAWS(MAD)-2004-3-256

MOHAN Vs. STATE

Decided On March 29, 2004
MOHAN Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition to direct the respondent to proceed against the accused for the alleged offence under Section 306 of I.P.C. in Crime No: 833 of 2002. The brief facts of the case are as follows : On 01.05.2002, the petitioner's daughter by name Saranya studying in 8th standard in a local Government School committed suicide by self immolation for the reasons that she was tortured by the four accused by using abusive language which will have a bearing on her character. On the complaint of the petitioner, a case in Crime No: 833 of 2002 in the respondent police station was registered against four persons by name Meerabi, Kaja, Nahoor and Murali for alleged offences under Section 306 of I.P.C. The case was investigated and the respondent filed a final report for alleged offences only under Section 354 and 5 09 of I.P.C. against the accused thereby deleting Section 306 of I.P.C. Aggrieved over the same, this petition has been filed to direct the respondent police to file charge sheet for alleged offence under Section 306 of I.P.C.

(2.) Learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) produced the C.D. file and submits that the Deputy Director, Criminal Prosecution Department, has given an opinion that no case can be filed for an offence under Section 306 of I.P.C. since there is no evidence to show that the accused persons instigated the victim girl to commit suicide. The opinion of the Deputy Director, Criminal Prosecution Department, was perused. He has opined that there is sufficient evidence to show that the accused used filthy language which will have a bearing on the character of the girl who committed suicide and there is sufficient evidence for the said occurrence. But the Deputy Director, has further stated that there is no proof that the accused had instigated the deceased to commit suicide and therefore, he has given his opinion that offence under Section 306 is not made out.

(3.) The opinion of the Deputy Director, is patently wrong. He has not applied his mind to the facts of the case in a proper manner and has given a one line opinion in favour of the accused to make a serious case triable by a Court of Sessions to be a simple case to be tried by a Magistrate.