TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (3) TMI 1784
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of 2006. 4. Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of this appeal are recapitulated as under: 5. One Kamatchi (deceased), daughter of Duraipandi Nadar (complainant) was married to Anandraj (A-1), son of Mahalinga Nadar on 6.9.2001. Mahalinga Nadar and his wife Anna Lakshmi (A-5) had three sons whose names are shown as under: Anandraj (A-1) even after marriage with Kamatchi (the deceased)stayed with his two brothers and parents in the joint family. Kamatchi delivered a female child on 7.1.2003. Accused Anandraj's elder brother, M. Mohan (A-2) and his wife Easwari (A-3) owned a Qualis car. On the date of Pongal, i.e., on 14.01.2005, Kamatchi's in-laws family planned a visit to the Theme Park at Madurai from Karaikudi. Deceased Kamatchi, her husband Anandraj (A-1) were denied the use of the said family car. Other members of the family had gone to the Theme Park in the family car whereas the deceased Kamatchi and her husband Anandraj (A-1) were told by Easwari (A-3) to reach the destination by public bus who is alleged to have said to Kamatchi that "if you want to go by a car, you have to bring a car from your family". 6. Kamatchi along with her husband A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vestigate the case and filed a Charge Sheet on 29.4.2005 not only against Anandraj (A-1), the deceased's husband and M. Mohan (A-2), her brother-in-law and his wife, Easwari (A-3), but also against the Appellants herein who are elder brother of the husband of the deceased and the mother of Appellant No. 1 respectively under Sections 304B, 498A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C.'). A copy of the charge sheet dated 29.4.2005 was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi. 12. The learned Magistrate, on perusing the final report, took the same on file by assigning P.R.C. No. 11/2005 and summoned the accused to furnish copies before committing the case to the Court of Sessions for trial. 13. The Appellants, aggrieved by the vexatious prosecution initiated at the behest of the Respondent approached the High Court of Judicature at Madras for quashing the proceedings against them under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure The learned Single Judge, while quashing the charges under Sections 498A and 304B I.P.C. against the Appellants, partly allowed their petition and held that they have to face trial for the offence under Section 306 I.P.C.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Pongal festival, her family had gone to Madurai ('Athisayam') in the said Qualis car. They refused to take my daughter along with them in the said car, and they have also teased and insulted her and told her to come in the bus and also said 'do you want to use a car then why you did not get a car'. My daughter informed about this incident to me over the phone and before I could get a car ready for her today on 18.1.2005, at about 1.30 hours, my son-in-law, Anandraj, informed over phone that my daughter had hanged herself and is dead. My son- in-law Anandraj and Mohan's wife Easwari who were cause for my daughter's death.... The above quoted portion of the F.I.R. also indicates that all allegations are confined to Anandraj (A-1), the husband of the deceased and his sister-in-law, Easwari (A-3). According to the Appellants, from the entire material available on record, by no stretch of imagination, an offence under Section 306 I.P.C. was made out against the Appellants and the impugned judgment of the High Court is contrary to the law as has been laid down by this Court in a series of judgments. 15. According to the Appellants, the High Court in the impu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... I.P.C. is not attracted in the facts of the present case. 18. According to the Appellants, the present case is a fit case wherein the charges under Section 306 I.P.C. are liable to be quashed for the following sequence of events and reasons: On 06.09.2002, Kamatchi, (the deceased in the case) got married to Anandaraj (A-1). After the marriage they lived with two other brothers of the AI and the parent in laws jointly. Deceased is stated to have had cordial relations with every member of the family. On 7.1.2003, Anandaraj (A-1) and Kamatchi were blessed with one female child. The child was christened as Nithyasree. On 14.1.2005, the entire family decided to go to 'Adisayam' a Theme park at Madurai to celebrate and enjoy the Pongal Holidays. Kamatchi was prevented from travelling in a Qualis car by Easwari (A-3) and is alleged to have taunted Kamatchi, "if you want to travel by a car please get a car from your parents". Thereafter, leaving Anandaraj, Kamatchi and their child, they proceeded to Madurai to visit the Theme Park 'Adisayam' by a Qualis car. Anandaraj and his family also proceeded to Madurai to visit the Theme Park an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an and Anna Lakshmi, who are arrayed as Accused 4 and 5 respectively in the final report either at the time of lodging of the complaint and registration of FIR or at the time of inquest enquiry or even in the statements before the R.D.O. On the contrary the complainant has alleged that it is only Easwari (A-3) who is the cause of the suicide. It may be relevant to extract certain portions of the F.I.R., R.D.O. Report and the Alteration Report filed by the Respondent. 21. In the R.D.O. Report dated 3.2.2005, the following statement of the complainant is extracted: My son-in-law Thiru M. Anandraj is running a provision shop at Karaikudi of his own. In that his brother Mohan is also having a share. My son-in-law looked after my daughter in good manner. All of them in their house treated my daughter in a good way. He informed that Smt. Eswari, wife of Mohan alone used to quarrel with my daughter often. Due to her torture alone my daughter might have hanged herself and committed suicide. In the death, apart from Smt. Eswari, he informed that no other is having any part. He has also stated that there is no dowry harassment in the death. (emphasis added) 22. Again ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the case at hand. In these facts and circumstances, to compel the Appellants to face the rigmarole of a trial would be an abuse of law. 28. The Appellants also submitted that there is no material on record to proceed against the Appellants for an offence punishable under Section 306 I.P.C. No conviction can be recorded in absence of legal evidence. According to the Appellants, any further proceeding in this case will be an abuse of the process. According to them, this is a fit case warranting interference by this Court. 29. The Appellants contended that the genesis of the prosecution is on the basis of the complaint preferred by the father of the deceased Kamatchi. He had categorically stated that his daughter had committed suicide due to the taunts of Easwari (A-3). According to the complainant, his son-in-law, Anandraj (A-1) and the said Easwari (A-3) alone were responsible for the death of his daughter. 30. The Appellants also contended that in pursuance to that complaint, the R.D.O. held an inquest by examining few witnesses including the father, the mother and the brother-in-law (sister's husband) of the deceased and others. In their statements, none of them ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 306 IPC are also liable to be quashed. 33. The Appellants has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Mahendra Singh and Anr. v. State of M.P. 1995 Supp. (3) SCC 731. In this case the allegations levelled were as under: My mother-in-law and husband and sister-in-law (husband's elder brother's wife) harassed me. They beat me and abused me. My husband Mahendra wants to marry a second time. He has illicit connections with my sister- in-law. Because of these reasons and being harassed I want to die by burning. 34. This Court while acquitting the Appellant observed that neither of the ingredients of abetment are attracted on the statement of the deceased. 35. In the instant case, what to talk of existence of instances or illustrations of instigation, there are no specific allegations levelled against the Appellants. On a careful perusal of the entire material on record, no offence under Section 306 IPC can be made out against the Appellants, in view of our clear and definite finding that there is no material whatsoever against the Appellants much less positive act on the part of the Appellants to instigate or aid in committing the suicide. 36. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tate of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 SCC 618, in which a three-Judge Bench of this Court had an occasion to deal with the case of a similar nature. In a dispute between the husband and wife, the Appellant husband uttered "you are free to do whatever you wish and go wherever you like". Thereafter, the wife of the Appellant Ramesh Kumar committed suicide. This Court in paragraph 20 has examined different shades of the meaning of "instigation'. Para 20 reads as under: 20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect. or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. the present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de seeing no option and this act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he/she committed suicide. 47. In V.P. Shrivastava v. Indian Explosives Limited and Ors. (2010) 10 SCC 361, this Court has held that when prima facie no case is made out against the accused, then the High Court ought to have exercised the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and quashed the complaint. 48. In a recent judgment of this Court in the case of Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat and Anr. (2010 ) 8 SCC 628, this Court quashed the conviction under Section 306 IPC on the ground that the allegations were irrelevant and baseless and observed that the High Court was in error in not quashing the proceedings. 49. In the instant case, what to talk of instances of instigation, there are even no allegations against the Appellants. There is also no proximate link between the incident of 14.1.2005 when the deceased was denied permission to use the Qualis car with the factum of suicide which had taken place on 18.1.2005. 50. Undoubtedly, the deceased had died because of hanging. The deceased was undoubtedly hyper-sensitive to ordinary petulan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... offence which is alleged against the accused; (2) where the allegations made in the complaint are patently absurd and inherently improbable so that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused; (3) where the discretion exercised by the Magistrate in issuing process is capricious and arbitrary having been based either on no evidence or on materials which are wholly irrelevant or inadmissible; and (4) where the complaint suffers from fundamental legal defects, such as, want of sanction, or absence of a complaint by legally competent authority and the like. 55. This Court in State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy and Ors. (1977) 2 SCC 699, observed that the wholesome power under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure entitles the High Court to quash a proceeding when it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceedings to continue would be an abuse of the process of the court or that the ends of justice requires that the proceedings ought to be quashed. The High Courts have been invested with inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters, to achieve a salutary public purpose. A Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o Section 561A of the old Code and to Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure proceeds on the same principle and deals with the inherent powers of the High Court. The rule of inherent powers has its source in the maxim "Quadolex aliquid alicui concedit, concedere videtur id sine quo ipsa, ess uon potest" which means that when the law gives anything to anyone, it gives also all those things without which the thing itself could not exist. 132. The criminal courts are clothed with inherent power to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice. Such power though unrestricted and undefined should not be capriciously or arbitrarily exercised, but should be exercised in appropriate cases, ex debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice for the administration of which alone the courts exist. The powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Courts must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. 59. In Emperor v. Khwaja Nazir Ahmad AIR 1945 PC 18 and Lala Jairam Das v. Emperor AIR 1945 PC 94 the Ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of an offence is the field exclusively reserved for the police officers whose powers in that field are unfettered so long as the power to investigate into the cognizable offences is legitimately exercised in strict compliance with the provisions falling under Chapter XII of the Code and the courts are not justified in obliterating the track of investigation when the investigating agencies are well within their legal bounds as aforementioned. Indeed, a noticeable feature of the scheme under Chapter XIV of the Code is that a Magistrate is kept in the picture at all stages of the police investigation but he is not authorised to interfere with the actual investigation or to direct the police how that investigation is to be conducted. But if a police officer transgresses the circumscribed limits and improperly and illegally exercises his investigatory powers in breach of any statutory provision causing serious prejudice to the personal liberty and also property of a citizen, then the court on being approached by the person aggrieved for the redress of any grievance, has to consider the nature and extent of the breach and pass appropriate orders as may be called for without leaving ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceedings is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. 66. In G. Sagar Suri and Anr. v. State of UP and Ors. (2000) 2 SCC 636, this Court observed that it is the duty and obligation of the criminal court to exercise a great deal of caution in issuing the process particularly when matters are essentially of civil in nature. 67. In State of A.P. v. Golconda Linga Swamy and Anr. (2004) 6 SCC 522, this Court observed as under: Exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code in a case of this nature is the exception and not the rule. The section does not confer any new powers on the High Court. It only saves the inherent power which the Court possessed before the enactment of the Code. It envisages ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and whether any offence is made out even if the allegations are accepted in toto. 68. This Court in Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. v. Mohd. Sharaful Haque and Anr. (2005) 1 SCC 122, observed thus: It would be an abuse of process of the court to allow any action which would result in injustice and prevent promotion of justice. In exercise of the powers, court would be justified to quash any proceeding if it finds that initiation/ continuance of it amounts to abuse of the process of court or quashing of these proceedings would otherwise serve the ends of justice. When no offence is disclosed by the complaint, the court may examine the question of fact. When a complaint is sought to be quashed, it is permissible to look into the materials to assess what the complainant has alleged and whether any offence is made out even if the allegations are accepted in toto. 69. In Devendra and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. (2009) 7 SCC 495, this Court observed as under: There is no dispute with regard to the aforementioned propositions of law. However, it is now well settled that the High Court ordinarily would exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482....