DHAS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.301 of 2018 on the file of the first respondent police for the offence under Sections 451, 354 (A) and 309 of IPC . Subsequently, altered into offence under Sections 452, 354 (A), 376, 306 and r/w 34 and 212 of IPC .

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that there are totally three accused. In which, the petitioners are arrayed as A2 and A3. The complaint lodged by the second respondent alleging that when the victim girl was alone in her home on 11.10.2018, her relative namely, the first accused had sought hammer from her. While, the victim girl requested him to adjust T.V channels, the first accused mis-behaved with her and as such, she felt ashamed and poured kerosene on her and set fire to herself. Therefore, she sustained grievous injurious and admitted into the Government Medical College Hospital, Assaripallam.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that the victim succumbed due to burnt injuries on 19.10.2018. Even according to the case of the prosecution, the petitioners have no overt act in the occurrence. The entire allegations are only as against the first accused, since he only mis-behaved and as such the victim girl herself set fire. On the confession of the first accused, the petitioners have been implicated as an accused for the reason that they provided shelter to the first accused after the occurrence. Therefore, there is absolutely no prima facie case to attract any of the offence as alleged by the prosecution as against the petitioners. Insofar as the offence under Section 34 IPC is concerned, the petitioners happened to be the relative of the first accused, except that no other intention commonly to do the offence. He further submitted that insofar as the offence under Section 212 of IPC is concerned, the petitioners never gave any shelter to them and never helped him to escape from the scene of crime and as such the entire proceedings are initiated nothing but clear abuse of process of law. He also relied upon the judgment in the case of Anand Kumar Mohatta and another Vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) Department of Home and another reported in AIR 2019 SC 210.