THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus DEEPAK

Citation: [2019] 2 S.C.R. 1055 · Decided: 13-03-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1055
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
v.
DEEPAK
(Criminal Appeal No. 485 of  2019)
MARCH 13, 2019
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND
HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
s.397 r/w s.401 – Revisional jurisdiction – Exercise of, scope
– Discussed – In the instant case, the prosecution case was that the
victim-deceased and the respondent were employees in the Central
Bank – The deceased was subjected to harassment by the respondent
which led to her committing suicide by consuming poison – Charges
were framed against the respondent under s.306 IPC and s.3(2)(v)
of SC & ST Act by the Special Judge – High Court discharged the
respondent from charges on the ground that there was no evidence
with regard to provocation, incitement or encouragement which led
to commission of suicide by the deceased – On  State’s appeal, held:
High Court evidently ignored what had emerged during the course
of the investigation – The material indicated that several complaints
were filed by the deceased alleging harassment caused to her by
the respondent – The last of them was filed a few days before she
committed suicide – It was alleged that the respondent had taken a
loan of Rs 5 lakhs through fraudulent means in the name of the
deceased and an altercation took place between him and the
deceased in that regard – Moreover, the respondent was alleged to
have got the deceased evicted from a rented house as well as
terminated her from employment at Central Bank – There was a
dying declaration also to that effect – Sufficient material was on
record to uphold the order framing charges by the Special Judge –
Therefore, discharge of the accused was not justified – High Court’s
order set aside – Penal Code, 1860 – s.306 –  The Scheduled Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Acts, 1989 –
s.3(2)(v).
Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander (2012) 9 SCC 460 :
[2012] 7 SCR 988; State of Rajasthan v. Fatehkaran
Mehdu (2017) 3 SCC 198 : [2017] 2 SCR 491; Chitresh
Kumar Chopra v. State (NCT) of Delhi (2009) 16 SCC
605 : [2009] 13  SCR 230; Rajbir Singh v. State of U P
(2006) 4 SCC 51 : [2006] 2 SCR 1134  – relied on.
[2019] 2 S.C.R. 1055
1055
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1056                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2019] 2 S.C.R.
Case Law Reference
[2012] 7   SCR 988
relied on
Para 11
[2017] 2  SCR 491
relied on
Para 12
[2009] 13   SCR 230
relied on
Para 14
[2006] 2   SCR 1134
relied on
Para 15
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No. 485 of 2019.
From the Judgment and Order dated 31.01.2018 of the High Court
of M.P., Bench at Indore in CRR No. 458 of 2018.
Vaibhav Srivastava, Praduman K., H. Parashar and Rahul Kaushik,
Advs. for the Appellant.
Shivam Sharma, Ms. Meghna Mittal, R. K. Yadav and Raj Kishor
Choudhary, Advs. for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal arises from a judgment dated 31 January,
2018 of a learned Single Judge of the Indore Bench of the High Court of
Madhya Pradesh1 discharging the Respondent from charges framed by
the Special Judge, Neemuch. The Special Judge, Neemuch had by an
order dated 13.10.17 in Special Case No. 51 of 2017 framed charges
against the respondent under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code,
18602 and Section 3(2)(V) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3. In pursuance of the notice issued by this Court on 19 November,
2018, the respondent has entered appearance through learned counsel.
We have heard the Deputy Advocate General for the State of Madhya
Pradesh and learned counsel for the respondent.
4. On 9 August 2017, Jyoti Sharma committed suicide by consuming
poison at her residence at Neemuch. Immediately after she consumed
poison, she was moved to the District hospital for treatment.  The dying
1In Criminal Revision No. 458 of 2018
2”Penal Code”
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1057
declaration of the victim was recorded on 9August 2017 in the presence
of the Naib Tehsildar, Neemuch. The relevant part of the dying
declaration is extracted below:
“Question: What has happened to you?
Answer:  I have consumed poison.
Question: Why you have consumed poison?
Answer: I am not able to get the job, wherever I go, Deepak
Bhamawat R/o Jeeran, get me sacked out from the job.  Earlier
he had molested me, on which, I had instituted a case against him,
since then, he is harassing me.
Question: Whether you want to say anything else?
Answer: No.”
5. Jyoti 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.