JAIPRAKASH VAISHNAV Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under section 482 Crimial P.C. 1973 seeking quashment of the FIR dated 29/08/2017 registered at crime No.301/2017 in Police Station Sanyogitanj, District Indore and the consequent criminal proceedings arising therefrom including sessions trial No.59/2018 pending before Ninth Additional Sessions Judge, Indore.

(2.) Facts relevant and necessary for disposal of this petition are in narrow compass: the complainant - Vidhya Joish had filed a complaint on 23/05/2017 against the petitioner with the allegations; her son Kailash Joshi in the year 2011 had taken loan of Rs. 5,00,000.00 and the same was required to be repaid with 8% interest. Four blank cheques and one stamp paper signed by Kailash Joshi were kept by the petitioner with him. Despite, repayment of the entire loan to the tune of Rs. 8,00,000.00 together with interest, the signed cheques and the stamp paper were not returned instead, the petitioner threatened family members of the complainant with dire consequences and pressurized them to further pay money else, they would be prosecuted. In the year 2016; he had filled up the cheques on his own with an amount of Rs. 8,40,000.00, 3,00,000 and the remaining two cheques of Rs. 2,00,000.00 each. Thereafter, presented them in his bank for payment and got them bounced. He has filed two criminal cases against Kailash Joshi under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant and her family members were constantly disturbed, humiliated and threatened by the petitioner and his associates/anti-social elements off and on. The constant humiliation and embarrassment led the husband of the complainant and father of Kailash Joshi; the deceased Yashwant Joshi in deep depression as a result he consumed poison and committed suicide in Government school on 26/02/2017. Her complaint did not receive attention of the concerned police station, therefore, she filed a writ petition before this Court being W.P.No.5013/2017. While disposing of writ petition on 21/08/2017, in the light of the directives issued by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2014) 2 SCC 1 it was directed that if cognizable offence is found to have been committed, the concerned police shall ensure registration of the complaint for further investigation. Accordingly, FIR has been registered at crime No.301/2017. During the course of investigation, statements of members of the family; Vidhya Joshi (complainant), Kailash Joshi and other family; Deeraj Joshi, Ramesh Chandra Joshi, Manish Joshi amongst others have been recorded. Kailash Joshi in his statement has stated that he with his father were running a tea stall to earn the livelihood. For business purpose, he had taken loan of Rs. 5,00,000.00 from the petitioner Though, he had repaid the entire amount with 8% interest but, the signed cheques and stamp paper were not returned to him instead; the petitioner threatened the family members with dire consequences and pressurized them to further pay money else, they would be prosecuted. In the year 2016; he had filled up the cheques of his own with an amount of Rs. 8, 40,000.00, 3,00,000 and the remaining two cheques of Rs. 2,00,000.00 each. Thereafter, presented them in his bank for payment and got them bounced. He has filed two criminal cases against Kailash Joshi under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Petitioner himself and through his anti-social group of gundas used to phone them threatening to face the criminal cases if a complaint is filed against him. Not only this, the petitioner used to send his gang men to their shop to fetch either Yashwant or Kailash Joshi. Late Yashwant had disclosed the constant threat, embarrassment and humiliation by the petitioner to his wife (the complainant) even a day before, he committed suicide on 26/02/2017. He has further stated that on 21/03/2017, the petitioner had called him and his mother in the context of cheques bounce case and got their signatures on affidavits and they have been misused in the police station. Similar is the statement of the complainant Vidhya Joshi. Her statement is consistent with the statement of Kailash Joshi. Dhiraj Joshi s/o Rameshchandra Joshi, nephew of the deceased, Yashwant Joshi has also disclosed his knowledge about the constant threat to Yashwant Joshi and Kailash Joshi at the hands of the petitioner in the aforesaid matter of alleged money transaction. Manish Joshi s/o Harishankar Joshi who is also a nephew of the deceased Yashwant Joshi had made similar statement under section 161 Crimial P.C. 1973 With the aforesaid material on record, the concerned police station has submitted challan and now the sessions trial No.59/2018 is pending consideration.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that allegations contained in the FIR do not fulfill the ingredients either 'abetment of a thing' as defined under section 107 Penal Code or 'abetment of suicide' as defined under section 306 IPC. There was no money transaction between the petitioner and the deceased Yashwant Joshi. Therefore, the question of harassment or embarrassment of the deceased Yashwant Joshi at the instance of the petitioner did not arise. As such, there was no proximity with the alleged act of commission of suicide. Moreover, the deceased Yashwant Joshi has committed suicide on 26/02/2017 and the complaint was filed on 23/05/2017. Therefore, there is inordinate delay in filing the complaint and this by itself is sufficient to quash the FIR and the consequential criminal proceedings. Learned counsel further contends that even otherwise there is nothing on record to suggest predetermination of mind and mens rea on the part of the petitioner of abetment of suicide. Relying upon the Judgements of the Honourable Supreme Court in the cases of State of Punjab Vs. Iqbal Singh, AIR 1991 SC 1532, Sanju alias Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR SC 1998, Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Chhatisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618, M. Mohan Vs. State of Madras, 2011 Cr. L.J. 1900 and Devendra and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2009) 7 SCC 495, learned counsel submits that for want of sufficient material on record to constitute the offence of abetment of suicide as defined under section 306 IPC, the FIR and the consequential criminal proceedings deserves to be quashed.