M.KAVITA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are A-1 to A-4, seek to quash the proceedings initiated against them in P.R.C.No.4 of 2018 on the file of the XVI-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 306, 201 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that A-1, A-2 and A-3 are own sisters of A-4. One Sravani (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") is the wife of A-4 and the 2nd respondent/de facto complainant is the mother of the deceased. The marriage between the deceased and A-4 took place on 15.04.2012, they lived at Aliabad, Shahalibanda, Hyderabad and even after five years of marriage, they had no issues. On 21.12.2017, the mother-in-law of the deceased died due to illhealth, on which A-1 to A-4 started harassing the deceased by saying that the deceased had not provided any food to their mother, as a result of which, their mother died. Subsequently, A-1 to A-3 assaulted the deceased with hands and that the deceased informed the same to her mother over phone. Since the deceased was issueless, A-4 sent her to her parents' house, where she resided for six months. Thereafter, on the promise made by A-4 that he will take care of the deceased well, the deceased was sent back to her matrimonial house. But, A-4 continued the harassment and ill-treatment towards the deceased. On 23.12.2017 morning also, the deceased informed the 2nd respondent that A-1 to A-3 harassed her and assaulted her with hands. As the deceased could not withstand the continuous harassment and ill-treatment of the accused, she committed suicide at her house on 23.12.2017 at about 12.30 hours by hanging herself by tying her chunni to the iron rod of their store room.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 submitted that that the entire allegations in the complaint and charge sheet as well as 161 Cr.P.C. statements of the witnesses do not disclose the ingredients of Sections 498-A, 306 and 201 of I.P.C. He further submitted that there is nothing on record to show that the petitioners abetted the deceased by instigation or aiding to commit suicide. He further submitted that the petitioners 1 to 3/A-1 to A-3, who were married long prior to the incident, are in no way concerned with the family of the deceased and A-4. The petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in SANJU @ SANJAY SINGH SENGAR V. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, 2002 5 SCC 371 the learned Counsel would contend that the ingredients of Section 107 of IPC are not at all made out and as such the petitioners could not be prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 306 of I.P.C.