PRIYABHANSHU RANJAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. This application has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings of Koderma (T) P.S.Case No. 171/2010, including the order dated 25/07/2012, passed by the then Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma, whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, has been taken against the petitioner.

(2.) MR . S.K.Murari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that one Nirupma Pathak when was found dead, a UD case was registered. When post mortem of the dead body was conducted ligature mark was found but it was not anti mortem rather it was post mortem and even the hyoid bone was not found fractured and, therefore, first information report was lodged against the mother of Nirupma Pathak and other unknown persons putting allegation that she has committed murder of her daughter. In course of investigation, it got transpired that Nirupma Pathak , who had been carrying pregnancy of three months had love affairs with the petitioner, who was residing at Delhi, and that she was being tortured by her mother. It further transpired that the petitioner and deceased were in touch with each other and were communicating to each other through SMS, whereby the petitioner was insisting upon the deceased to come to Delhi if she is being tortured at Koderma, and SMS sent by the petitioner had even been replied at several occasions by the deceased. In spite of that, charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner though there has been no material on record to indicate that this petitioner, in any manner, abetted the deceased to commit suicide. Still, the Court has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code against this petitioner, which, in the facts and circumstances, is quite illegal.

(3.) FROM perusal of this SMS, it seems that the deceased was pressurized by the petitioner for coming to Delhi and her mother and father did not give consent to go to Delhi and due to this the petitioner was giving threatening about his death if she did not come to Delhi for that she given him Nasihat to the petitioner not to take any stream step and when her parents did not give their consent for going to Delhi she committed suicide."