Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010260332025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1506/2025 MILAN DAS S/O. LATE HARICHARAN DAS, VILLAGE-KALJAR, P.O. P.S. BARAMA, DISTRICT-BAKSA, ASSAM, PIN-781346 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SRI DIPAK UPADHYAYA S/O. LT. GANGADHAR UPADHYAYA R/O. VILLAGENASBAR P.O.BEDETI P.S. BEHALI MOUZABEHALI DISTRICT-BISWANATH ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R M CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 18.06.2026 Heard Mr. R.M. Choudhury, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. Steps for service of notice upon respondent no.2 were taken a number of times but the service could not be completed and as such this matter is taken up without the representation on behalf of respondent no.2. 3. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the First Information Report filed on 06.07.2025 in pursuance to which Behali P.S. Case was registered being Behali P.S. Case No. 67/2025 under Section 108/351(2)/3(5) of BNSS, 2023. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the charge sheet submitted in the instant case. 4. The case of the petitioner is that an FIR was lodged against him and another on 06.07.2025 alleging therein that the Head Teacher of Lohairam M.V. School had committed suicide by hanging in her residence in the early hours of 06.07.2025 i.e. at around 04:00 am. In the said FIR, it is alleged that a suicide note was left by the deceased, wherein it was stated that due to unbearable harassment meted out by the petitioner, she was bound to take the extreme step. Allegations were also made against one Brojen Das, who was working as the Assistant Teacher in the said school. The said FIR was lodged by the husband of the deceased. 5. On completion of the investigation of the said case, the police submitted a charge sheet on 08.09.2025 and in the said charge sheet, it was stated that Page No.# 3/5 during the investigation of the case, the suicide note was sent for FSL examination. The police have also stated that they have seized one pass book of the deceased as well as one red color note book and also a written complaint given to the Member of Parliament by the deceased alleging harassment by the petitioner upon her. The police further stated that they have collected the FSL report on the suicide note and the note books and that the Scientific Officer had opined that the documents were carefully and thoroughly examined and the signatures and writings were also examined for detection of forgery and it is further stated that a definite opinion could not be expressed regarding examination of ink. 6. The post mortem report of the deceased reflects that an oblique non- continuous ligature mark was found around the neck above the level of thyroid cartilage. However, the opinion was kept pending till receipt of the FSL report and the said FSL report was collected by the police which suggests negative results for presence of blood and semen in the Exhibits given to them for examination, which includes the undergarment of the deceased and the final postmortem report was collected, and the report suggested that the deceased died due to asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem hanging. 7. On the basis of the said investigation, the petitioner was arrested and was forwarded to judicial custody. However, thereafter the petitioner was released on bail. 8. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was the Block Elementary Education Officer and that he had issued a show cause notice to the deceased for giving wrong information to the effect that uniforms were supplied to all the students of her school as well as certain allegations with regard to mid day meal. The learned Counsel further submits that the deceased Page No.# 4/5 had submitted her replies to the said show cause notice stating inter alia that although uniforms were supplied to the students but due to some mistake in the size and colour, the same was returned to the vendors and new uniforms were called from the said vendors but since the supply was made she had given a report that the uniforms were completely given to the students and in the said reply, she had also asked for apology. The learned Counsel further submits that the deceased had also given subsequent undertakings as well as letters to the petitioner for forgiving her with respect to the said mistake committed by her. 9. As such the learned Counsel submits that there was no harassment on the part of the petitioner being meted out to the deceased and the same cannot be a ground for her to commit suicide. Accordingly, he submits that the FIR be quashed in respect of the petitioner. 10. Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submits that in presence of the suicide note as well as the contents of the FIR and also by looking into the replies filed by the deceased it can be seen without any doubt that the deceased felt the torture upon her committed by the BEEO and as such he submits that the said FIR does not call for any interference or quashing as well as the charge sheet. 11. On consideration of the submissions of the learned Counsels, this Court finds as follows : A bare perusal of the suicide note dated 05.07.2025 shows that the petitioner felt the harassment meted out to her by the petitioner and she got ashamed due to the same. It was also stated in the suicide note that she has lost her mental stability due to the harassment of the petitioner. In the FIR lodged by her husband, it is also seen that allegations were made against the petitioner for inflicting continuous mental harassment upon the deceased. It was stated in the FIR that other teachers of the area were also facing Page No.# 5/5 harassment meted out by the petitioner and further that the deceased had written about the harassment to the Member of Parliament also by way of a letter on 26.06.2025. However, it is not clear as to what exact harassment is alleged to have been meted out by the petitioner upon the deceased. The only harassment that is pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that show cause notice issued by the petitioner to the deceased about allegations of supplying full uniforms to all the students as well as allegations regarding mid day meal. It is also seen that the deceased had given a number of replies along with the undertaking regarding the charges made against her and also with the apology that such things will not happen again and thereafter the deceased had written a letter to the petitioner for leave due to her skin problems wherein she had also stated that she was extremely unwell and the leave application was submitted on 04.07.2025 asking for a leave from 05.07.2025 to 08.07.2025. It is unknown as to the exact harassment meted out by the BEEO i.e. the petitioner upon the deceased, which is not forthcoming both from the suicide note as well as the FIR. In the opinion of this Court, there is something more to the reason shown by petitioner. 12. In view of the same, this Court does not deem it fit to quash the FIR as well as the charge sheet as prayed for by the petitioner. 13. The petition is as such dismissed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant