“Reportable”

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1291 OF 2008

Madan Mohan Singh … Appellant

Versus

State of Gujarat & Anr. … Respondents

WITH

CRLMP NO. 12749 OF 2008

J U D G M E N T

V.S. SIRPURKAR, J.

1. The accused who faces prosecution for offences under Section  

306 and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) comes up before us  

being aggrieved by the High Court  judgment  by which his  petition  

under  Section  482  Cr.P.C.  was  dismissed.   In  that  petition  the  

accused/appellant had challenged the First Information Report (FIR)  

registered as C.R. No. 166 of 2008 at Naranpura Police Station.   

1

2. The said FIR is a long document which has been filed by one  

Harshida Ben, widow of Deepakbhai Krishnalal Joshi.  It is apparent  

from the said report that she was married to Deepakbhai Krishnalal  

Joshi serving in Ahmedabad Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. as a driver  

in the Microwave Project  Department.   He had undergone a heart  

bypass surgery in the year 2002 and he was asked by the doctor to  

avoid lifting heavy weights.   She further  stated that  the appellant,  

Madan Mohan Singh was working as a D.E.T. and her husband who  

was driving a Tata Sumo car was working under Madan Mohan Singh  

(accused herein).   She then complained that Madan Mohan Singh  

used to tell  his private errands to her husband and was harassing  

him.  Though Madan Mohan Singh was transferred, yet he kept on  

continuously using her husband.  In the year 2007, Madam Mohan  

Singh came back on transfer in the Microwave Project as D.E.T.  It is  

alleged that on the day when Madan Mohan Singh joined, he told her  

husband to  keep the keys  of  the vehicle  on the table.   However,  

according to her, her husband did not listen to that and took back the  

key on account of which Madan Mohan Singh had become angry and  

had threatened her husband of suspending him.  He also rebuked her  

husband that if he did not listen to him, he would create difficulties for  

2

her husband.  Madan Mohan Singh said to her husband as how he is  

still alive inspite of the insults.  It is then contended that on 21.2.2008,  

her  husband left  at  10’O Clock as per  rules with  tiffin  but  did  not  

return back in the evening and, therefore, his search was taken by his  

son Jatin from his colleagues like Raji Saheb and his absence was  

reported to the police on 22.2.2008 and 23.2.2008.  Ultimately, she  

came  to  know  that  her  husband’s  body  was  lying  in  the  dead  

condition  in  the  vehicle  No.  GJ  1  G 3472 at  Kiran  Park  opposite  

Gayatri  Hospital,  New  Vadaj.   She  also  suggested  further  that  a  

telephone call had come from Gujarat High Court informing her that  

there was a Xerox copy of the suicide note.  Lastly, it is stated that  

during  the  period  between  2003  to  21.2.2008  the  Head  of  the  

department  D.E.T.  Project  was  entrusting  his  house  work  to  her  

husband but her husband had not done the work entrusted to him  

and, therefore, he had bias against her husband and insulted him in  

front of the staff several times and because of this her husband got  

depressed and committed suicide.   

3. This  First  Information  Report  was  filed  and  registered  on  

17.3.2008 i.e. after the 24 days of the death of her husband.  It is this  

report which is challenged suggesting that even if the whole report is  

3

accepted  as  it  is,  it  did  not  disclose  any  offence  much  less  the  

offences under Sections 306 and 294, IPC.  Since, the Gujarat High  

Court did not agree and dismissed the petition; the appellant is before  

us now.   

4. Shri K.T.S. Tulsi, learned Senior Advocate took us through the  

FIR in which there is reference to a suicide note allegedly written by  

the  deceased,  a  Xerox  copy  of  which  was  produced  by  the  

complainant.   The copy of that suicide note was filed before us. It  

seems to  be  a  letter  dated  4.2.2008  written  to  the  Chief  General  

Manager,  Telecom  Project.   It  is  a  huge  complaint  in  which  the  

incident  dated  15.10.2007  was  mentioned  when  allegedly  the  

appellant asked the driver to keep the keys of the vehicle on the table  

and not to take away them.  There is also a complaint against the  

working style of the Madan Mohan Singh by the driver.  There is one  

significant sentence  I was put under mental tension by M.M. Singh.  

Without any concrete proof and evidence I was put under insulting   

position due to which I  began to feel  resentment and insult  and I   

came under depression.  

4

5. The further complaint in that so-called suicide note appears to  

be that the driver was not given a fixed vehicle though all the drivers  

were given fixed vehicles to drive.  There is also a complaint against  

one Raghunathan suggesting that he misled the DGM and had given  

him a very bad vehicle to drive.  By way of example, it was pointed  

out  that  the  keys  of  the  vehicle  were  taken  in  the  absence  of  

Incharge, M.K. Sovangya without giving any reasons verbally.  Then  

he was not given any charge of the vehicle and running log book.  

Thirdly, he was sent the transfer order by post.  The attendance of  

the office staff was not maintained and he was transferred and the  

vehicle  was given to  a regular  labour.   There is  also  a complaint  

about the salary of 15 days which was deducted by Madan Mohan  

Singh.   A  fair  inquiry  was  sought  for  by  the  said  driver.  It  was  

suggested that his retirement date was 25.12.2012 and salary should  

be recovered from Madan Mohan Singh as he had harassed him  

without  giving  any  concrete  reason.   It  is  then  suggested  in  the  

followings words:

I am going to commit suicide due to his functioning  style.  Alone M.M. Singh, D.E.T. Microwave Project is  responsible  for  my  death.   I  pray  humbly  to  the  officers  of  the  department  that  you  should  not  cooperate  as  human  being  to  defend  M.M.  Singh.  M.M.  Singh  has  acted  in  breach  of  discipline  

5

disregarding  the  norms  of  discipline.   I  humbly  request the Enquiry Officer that my wife and son may  not be harassed.  My life has been ruined by M.M.  Singh.”

6. This huge note is addressed to inquiry officer,  Chief General  

Manager and also to the Chief Justice. The biggest complaint against  

the accused is that he had changed the duty of this driver from one  

car to another though no other driver was ever transferred.  Again  

and  again,  the  deceased  has  insisted  that  the  only  person  

responsible for his suicide was Madan Mohan Singh.

7. We have gone through the suicide note though it is not yet on  

record.   Shri  Tulsi  pointed  out  that  even  if  this  suicide  note  is  

accepted as it is, along with the FIR, no ingredients of Sections 306  

and 294 (b), IPC could be spelt out from the same.  We have gone  

through the whole FIR as well as the so-called suicide note which  

seems to have been signed on 4.2.2008 wherein he had complained  

about the stale incidents dated 15.10.2007 to 19.10.2007.  It seems  

that it is 17 days after that, that he was found dead 23.2.2008.  It is  

claimed by his wife Harshida Ben that she got a call from the Gujarat  

High Court informing her that a suicide note was found and that she  

should search for such note in her house subsequent to which she  

6

claimed to have found the suicide note bearing the signature of the  

deceased, thus bringing the origin of alleged suicide note under the  

cloud of suspicion.

8. It is on this that Shri Tulsi contended that all this is absolutely  

absurd.  If  a person writes a suicide note on 4.2.2008, he had no  

business to send the suicide note to High Court  and keep a copy  

thereof in the house.  Learned Senior Counsel said that even if all this  

is accepted as it is, there is nothing to suggest that the appellant has  

committed any offence or that any offence could be spelt out from the  

said suicide note or the FIR much less offence under Sections 306  

and 294, IPC.  We are convinced that there is absolutely nothing in  

this suicide note or the FIR which would even distantly be viewed as  

an offence much less under Section 306, IPC.  We could not find  

anything in the FIR or in the so-called suicide note which could be  

suggested as abetment  to  commit  suicide.   In  such matters  there  

must be an allegation that the accused had instigated the deceased  

to commit suicide or secondly, had engaged with some other person  

in a conspiracy and lastly, that the accused had in any way aided any  

act or illegal omission to bring about the suicide.  In spite of our best  

efforts and microscopic examination of the suicide note and the FIR,  

7

all that we find is that the suicide note is a rhetoric document in the  

nature of a departmental complaint.  It also suggests some mental  

imbalance on the part of the deceased which he himself describes as  

depression.  In the so-called suicide note, it cannot be said that the  

accused  ever  intended  that  the  driver  under  him  should  commit  

suicide or should end his life and did anything in that behalf.  Even if it  

is accepted that the accused changed the duty of the driver or that  

the accused asked him not to take the keys of the car and to keep the  

keys of the car in the office itself, it does not mean that the accused  

intended or knew that the driver should commit suicide because of  

this.  In order to bring out an offence under Section 306, IPC specific  

abetment as contemplated by Section 107, IPC on the part  of  the  

accused with an intention to bring out the suicide of the concerned  

person as a result of that abetment is required.  The intention of the  

accused to  aid  or  to  instigate  or  to  abet  the deceased to  commit  

suicide is a must for this particular offence under Section 306, IPC.  

We are of the clear opinion that there is no question of there being  

any material for offence under Section 306, IPC either in the FIR or in  

the so-called suicide note.

8

9. It  is  absurd  to  even  think  that  a  superior  officer  like  the  

appellant  would  intend  to  bring  about  suicide  of  his  driver  and,  

therefore, abet the offence.  In fact, there is no nexus between the so  

called suicide (if at all it is one for which also there is no material on  

record)  and  any  of  the  alleged  acts  on  the  part  of  the  appellant.  

There is no proximity either.  In the prosecution under Section 306,  

IPC,  much  more  material  is  required.   The  Courts  have  to  be  

extremely  careful  as  the  main  person  is  not  available  for  cross-

examination  by  the  appellant/accused.   Unless,  therefore,  there  is  

specific allegation and material  of  definite nature (not imaginary or  

inferential one), it would be hazardous to ask the appellant/accused  

to face the trial.  A criminal trial is not exactly a pleasant experience.  

The person like the appellant  in present case who is serving in a  

responsible post  would certainly suffer  great prejudice, were he to  

face prosecution on absurd  allegations  of  irrelevant  nature.  In  the  

similar circumstances, as reported in Netai Dutta Vs. State of W.B.  

[2005 (2) SCC 659], this Court had quashed the proceedings initiated  

against the accused.

10. As regards the suicide note, which is a document of about 15  

pages, all that we can say is that it is an anguish expressed by the  

9

driver who felt that his boss (the accused) had wronged him.  The  

suicide note and the FIR do not impress us at all.  They cannot be  

depicted  as  expressing  anything  intentional  on  the  part  of  the  

accused that the deceased might commit suicide.  If the prosecutions  

are allowed to continue on such basis,  it  will  be difficult  for  every  

superior officer even to work.

11. It was tried to be contended by the learned counsel appearing  

on behalf of the complainant that at this stage, we should not go into  

the merits of the FIR or the said suicide note.  It is trite law now that  

where there is some material alleged in the FIR, then such FIR and  

the ensuing proceedings should not be quashed under Section 482  

Cr.P.C.  It is for this reason that we very closely examined the FIR to  

see whether it amounts to a proper complaint for the offence under  

Sections  306  and  294(b)  IPC.   Insofar  as  Section  294(b)  IPC  is  

concerned, we could not find a single word in the FIR or even in the  

so-called  suicide  note.   Insofar  as  Section  306 IPC is  concerned,  

even at  the cost of  repetition,  we may say that  merely because a  

person  had  a  grudge  against  his  superior  officer  and  committed  

suicide on account of that grudge, even honestly feeling that he was  

wronged, it would still not be a proper allegation for basing the charge  

10

under Section 306 IPC.  It will still fall short of a proper allegation.  It  

would  have  to  be  objectively  seen  whether  the  allegations  made  

could  reasonably  be  viewed  as  proper  allegations  against  the  

appellant/accused to the effect that he had intended or engineered  

the suicide of the concerned person by his acts, words etc.  When we  

put  the  present  FIR on  this  test,  it  falls  short.   We have  already  

explained that the baseless and irrelevant allegations could not be  

used as a basis for prosecution for a serious offence under Section  

306 IPC.  Similarly, we have already considered Section 294 (b) IPC  

also.   We  have  not  been  able  to  find  anything.   Under  such  

circumstances, where the FIR itself does not have any material or is  

not  capable  of  being viewed as having material  for  offence under  

Sections 306 and 294(b) IPC, as per the law laid down by this Court  

in State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors. [1992 Suppl. 1   

SCC 335], it would be only proper to quash the FIR and the further  

proceedings.

12. For all these reasons, we are of the clear opinion that the High  

Court erred in not quashing the proceedings.  Allowing this appeal,  

we set aside the order of the High Court and allowing the petition  

11

under  Section  482  Cr.P.C.  filed  by  the  appellant/accused,  the  

questioned proceedings are quashed.

……………………….J.  [V.S. Sirpurkar]

 ...………………….….J.

    [Cyriac Joseph]

New Delhi; August 17, 2010

12