1 2025:CGHC:2396-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 156 of 2025 1 - Johan Lal Ghosle S/o Lt. Shri Puprai Ghosle, Aged About 61 Years Present Address- Vikas Nagar 27 Kholi, Police Station - Civil Line, District- Bilaspur ( C.G.). Permanent Address- Village Mohtara, Police Station Masturi, District- Bilaspur (C.G). 2 - Babita Banjare W/o Shri Shivhendra Banjare Aged About 29 Years R/o Rodhindih, Police Station- Pamgarh, District- Janjgir- Champa ( C.G.). 3 - Sarita Ghosle W/o Shri Digvijay Ghosle Aged About 36 Years R/o Mohatara, Police Station Masturi District- Bilaspur ( C.G.). 4 - Trisal Ghosle S/o Shri Johan Lal Ghosle Aged About 23 Years Permanent Address- Village- Mohatra, Police Station Masturi, District- Bilaspur ( C.G.) Present Address- Vikas Nagar, 27 Kholi, Police Station- Civil Line, District- Bilaspur ( C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Civil Line District- Bilaspur ( C.G.). 2 - Same Lal Burman S/o Bahorik Lal Burman Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Rivapar, Police Station Shivarinarayan, District- Janjgir- Champa ( C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sakib Ahmad, Panel Lawyer 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 15 .01.2025 1. Heard Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sakib Ahmad, Panel Lawyer for the Respondent/ State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners who are the accused persons and facing trial of the offence under Section 306/34 of IPC arising out of the Crime No. 925/2024 registered at P.S. Civil Line, Bilaspur. The present petition has been filed for quashing of the FIR as well as charge-sheet and also the cognizance order dated 23.12.2024 and made following prayer in the petition:- “1. quash/ set aside the first information report registered at Police Station, Civil Line Bilaspur (CG), as Crime No. 925/2024, under Section 306/34 of IPC along with the charge-sheet filed on 06.12.2024, before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Bilaspur (CG), and resultant Criminal Case No. 18910/2024 and the order dated 23.12.2024, of taking cognizance of the offences and the subsequent proceedings in criminal case No. 18910/2024, in the interest of justice. 2. or any other relief as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice, equity and good conscious.” 3. The brief facts of the case as emerges from the pleadings and the documents annexed with the petition are that, on 25.02.2021, during the patrolling, the Head Constable, Jagdish Rathore received an intimation that a dead body was lying near Shitala Mandir, Kududand, Bilaspur. He gave the murg intimation to the Police and thereafter, inquest proceeding was drawn in 3 presence of the witnesses. During the inquiry, the suicidal note was also seized in which the present petitioners have been named and allegation against them is levelled that he committed suicide due to the harassment given by the petitioners to him and they are responsible for his death. Since, the death of the deceased was by suspected poising, the FIR has been registered for the offence under Section 306/34 of IPC against the petitioners and after due investigation of the offence, the charge-sheet has been filed on 06/12/2024 for the offence under Section 306/34 of IPC which is under challenge in the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that there is no ingredients of any abetment to commit suicide to the deceased in the entire charge-sheet as there is no specific allegation against them as to when and where they harassed him or abetted him to commit suicide. A general and omnibus allegation have been made against them. There is no nexus and proximity with the conduct and behaviour of the petitioners with that of the suicide committed by the deceased Arun Barman. In the absence of any sufficient material it would not be proper to compel the petitioners to face the criminal trial. Although, the said suicidal note has got examined by the State Examiner of questioned document and from his report, it is found that the said suicidal note was in the hand writing of the deceased yet the contents of the said suicidal note does not satisfy the requirement of the offence of Section 107 or 306 of IPC. There is no participation of the petitioners in the offence in question and they cannot be prosecuted when no sufficient material available in the charge-sheet. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for the relief claimed by them in the petition and the FIR as well as the charge-sheet and further proceeding of Criminal Case No. 18910/2024 pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur may be quashed. 4 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and have submitted that the deceased Arun Barman who was subjected to harass by the petitioners, who committed suicide by consuming poison and left a suicidal note in which he disclosed that he was the sufferer of the harassment of the petitioners and ultimately committed suicide. It has also been proved that said suicidal note was in the hand writing of the deceased. He would also submit that from the statement of the witnesses, it appears that the deceased was being harassed by his in laws and have raised quarrel and threatened him to rope in a false case of dowry and thereafter, he committed suicide. The suicidal note was seized from the pocket of the deceased and therefore, sufficient material available in the charge-sheet against the petitioners to proceed with the trial of the case and he is having an opportunity to raise his ground of challenge at the time of framing of charge before the learned trial Court. Therefore, the petition does not have any merit and is liable to be dismissed. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the petition. 7. From perusal of the material produced in the petition, it reflects that a suicidal note was seized from the pocket of the deceased in which he alleged that due to the harassment given by the petitioners, he committed suicide. The said suicidal note was further corroborated by the report of State Examiner of questioned document that it was written in the hand writing of the deceased. From the statement of the witnesses Santosh Barman, Sunil Barman, Sanjay Barman, Samaylal Barman, Arti Barman and also from the other material collected during the investigation, it appears that the matter needs evidence with respect to the nexus and proximity with the conduct and behavious of the 5 petitioners with that of the suicide committed by the deceased and also the alleged harassment given by the petitioners. The allegations against the petitioners are satisfied the ingredients of Section 107 and 306 of IPC or not would be decided only after recording of the witnesses and at present only prima facie material is to be seen and to consider as to wether the material produced by the prosecution with the charge-sheet are sufficient to proceed with the trial or not. Further that the charges are yet to be framed and the petitioners have every right to raise all other grounds at the time of framing of charge before the learned trial Court and it is very difficult for this Court to hold that no offence are made out against the petitioners from the material collected during the investigation and available in the charge-sheet to allow the petition and to quash the FIR as well as charge-sheet. Further in view of the suicidal note and also report submitted by the State Examiner of questioned document, there are sufficient material produced by the prosecution in the charge-sheet. 8. Therefore, under the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence available in the charge-sheet, we are not inclined to allow the petition. 9. Consequently, the present petition fails and hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Sagrika