1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION  

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.515-516 OF 2018 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 6453-54 of 2015)

MUNSHIRAM      …APPELLANT (S)  

VERSUS

STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR. ETC.           …RESPONDENT (S)

J U D G M E N T   

N. V. RAMANA, J.   

1. Leave granted.  

2. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order,

2

dt.  15.04.2015,  passed  by  the  High  Court  of  Judicature  for

Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous

Petition Nos. 2372 of 2014 and 3508 of 2014, wherein the High

Court quashed the FIR No. 318 of 2013 filed under Section 306

of IPC.  

3. Before we analyse the case at  hand, it  would be necessary to

observe the facts of this case which gave rise to the aforesaid FIR.

The  deceased  son  of  the  Appellant  herein  (Brijesh  Singh)  got

married to Respondent no.  2 -  wife  (Khushboo)  on 10.2.2008.

From the aforesaid wedlock, the couple were blessed with a male

child on 29.10.2009. It is to be noted that the wife on previous

occasions  had  filed  multiple  complaints  against  her  husband

which were ultimately compromised. Moreover, the husband had

also filed a complaint dt. 13.7.2010 alleging atrocities committed

by  her  and  her  family  on  the  deceased  and  his  family.  On

7.03.2013,  Respondent-  wife  instituted  another  proceeding

against the deceased. It is alleged that the deceased was under a

constant  fear  of  arrest  and  harassment  because  of  false

implication in criminal case. Thereafter a compromise is said to

have been entered into between the deceased and the respondent

-  wife,  wherein  he  had  promised  not  to  repeat  any  of  the

3

aforesaid occurrences. Thereafter, Respondent again filed an FIR

No. 152 of 2013 against the deceased and the Petitioner under

Sections 147, 323, 341 and 351 of  IPC. It  may not  be out of

context to mention here that the Respondent - wife also filed a

domestic violence case against the deceased son of the appellant.

It is alleged that on 8.7.2013, due to continuous humiliation and

suffering inflicted upon by the wife and the accused persons, the

Appellant’s  son  (Brijesh  Singh)  committed  suicide.  Before

committing the suicide, the deceased is said to have written two

suicide notes which needs to be recorded herein.  

Suicide Note 1 My wife Khushboo and his parents and family members since after marriage are threatening me and my family saying that we are dacoits and we will kill you and also have filed false cases of dowry and domestic  violence.  My wife  Khushboo has got  an illicit relation with Rajkumar the 2nd son of SI Gajadhar living in her neighbourhood and  Rajesh Aggarwal and  son of Fawji and others also keep on facilitating / helping them.  My wife, my in-laws and these boys are intending to grab the factory  and house  of  my parents,  this  is  why they  keep  on torturing us and do not allow me and my parents to meet my son.  Me  and  my  parents  are  in  deep  agony  since  after  my marriage.  The total  investment in the factory is done by my father and I have not contributed any penny. I love my wife and my child very much but she do not have any affection either for me and my parents so, her parents keep on threatening us and keep on filing false complaint and are trying to grab the house and factory by implicating my parents and my sister in false cases (sic)  

(redaction supplied)

Suicide Note 2

4

My wife Khushboo under the influence of Rajkumar the 2nd son of SI Gajodhar living in her neighbourhood,  Rajesh Aggarwal, her parents and other in-laws has got filed a false case against me, my parents and my sisters.  Due to which I am in deep mental stress. I am committing suicide. All these are conspiring to grab the house and factory of my parents. My parents are old and they may kindly be helped. The complete investment in the factory is done by my father after his retirement. I do not have any contribution in it. My wife wants to flee away to Delhi after grabbing all these and every day she keeps abusing us and also threatens to get us killed. She does not let us meet my son. I have always loved my wife. She has always betrayed me. She may be removed from the house of my parents. Safety of my parents be ensured (sic)

(redaction supplied)

4. In this context an FIR was lodged by the appellant under Section

306 of IPC against the Respondent-wife and her family members

alleging that they harassed his son which ultimately lead to him

committing suicide.

5. On 11.03.2014, the Police reported to the trial court, wherein it

was stated that the suicide notes were found to be matching the

handwriting  of  the  deceased  as  reported  by  forensic  science

laboratory.  

6. Aggrieved  by  the  aforesaid  FIR  being  registered  against  the

accused Respondents, they filed a petition under Section 482 of

CrPC before the High Court for quashing of the FIR No. 318 of

5

2013 for the offences of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of

IPC.  

7. The  High  Court  by  the  impugned  judgment  and  order  dt.

15.04.2015, quashed the aforesaid FIR on the ground that the

alleged offence of abetment of suicide was not made out in this

case. It would be relevant to note the reasoning of the High Court

before we further proceed with the discussion of this case:   

a. That the Court was of  the opinion that the suicide notes makes  reference  to  various  litigation  and  criminal complaints which were a result of actions of the deceased and were not filed with a view to harass him.  

b. The allegation concerning the adultery by the respondent - wife has not been evidenced by any material on record.  

c. The bad behaviour and alcoholism of the deceased has been categorically admitted in the compromise affidavit.  

d. That the allegations contained in the suicide note did not reveal the ingredients of abetment or instigation of suicide.  

e. That there is nothing to show the intention of the accused to instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide.  

f. That the suicide notes admit depression on the part of the deceased so as to commit suicide.  

8. Aggrieved  by  the  impugned  order,  the  father  of  the  deceased

(appellant  herein)  approached this  Court  through this  Special

Leave Petition.  

9. The learned counsel  appearing on behalf  of  the appellant  has

vehemently  contended  that  the  quashing  of  the  FIR  at  the

6

threshold  level  without  allowing  the  police  to  investigate  the

matter cannot be sustained as it was pre-mature. He has further

relied on the status report as well as the FSL report to portray

that there was a prima facie case for continuing the investigation.

10. Per  contra,  the  counsel  on  behalf  of  the  respondents  has

supported  the  impugned  judgment  and  contended  that  the

suicide was the  deceased’s own doing and the respondents in

both cases were beyond any blame as the litigation foisted upon

the  deceased  were  solely  attributable  to  his  own  actions  and

behaviour.  

11. Having  heard  the  learned  counsel  for  both  the  parties  and

perusing the material available on record we are of the opinion

that the High Court has prematurely quashed the FIR without

proper investigation being conducted by the Police. Further, it is

no more  res integra that Section 482 of CrPC has to be utilized

cautiously  while  quashing  the  FIR.  This  court  in  a  catena  of

cases has quashed FIR only after it comes to a conclusion that

continuing  investigation  in  such  cases  would  only  amount  to

abuse of the process. In this case at hand, the court abridged the

investigation which needed to ascertain certain factual assertions

7

made in the FIR concerning the existence or non-existence of any

prior mental condition of the deceased prior to the commission of

suicide.  

12. We are apprised of the FSL report which categorically states that

the handwriting of the deceased and the handwriting as present

in the suicide note  has similarities.  Further,  the status report

filed before the High Court notes as under:  

During  investigation,  after  receiving  information  of  the deceased Brijesh Singh from the hospital and after recording death FIR 15/13 under  section 174 CrPC,  investigation was started. Handwriting was recovered from the place of incident during inspection, which was identified by the complainant as the handwriting of his son and same was taken into custody. Statements  under  section  161 CrPC  of  complainant  Munshi Ram, witnesses Sh. Ajay Kumar, Hakam Singh, Smt. Ombati, Smt. Rekha, Smt. Meena, Smt. Pushpa, and Sh. Sher Singh were recorded. Thereafter, Munshi Ram got registered FIR No. 318/2013.  The  post-mortem  and  panchayatnama  of  the deceased was done and during this, written unsigned note was recovered from the half pant of the deceased and the same was also taken into possession. The post-mortem of the dead body of the victim was conducted. The clothes worn by the deceased were taken into custody and the dead body was handed over to the family members for  last  rites.  On 3.8.2013,  the file  was forwarded to Ld. ACC, Sadar for further investigation who sent the  suicide  note  to  FSL  for  examination.  Call  details  of  the suspect  were  obtained and on 17.2.2014,  the  main file  was entrusted to Ld. AACP, Vaishali Nagar. FSL Report with regard to suicide note was obtained by him. On 18.2.2014, case file was sent to Deputy Commissioner for further investigation who took statements of Smt. Shrawni Devi, Smt. Vimla Devi, Smt. Kalawati, Smt. Radha Agarwal, Smt. Manju Chowdhary, Shri Deepakshi  @ Charu, Shri  Harish Agarwal  under section 161 CrPC. Based on the investigation carried out as per the order no  8225-27  of  DCP  in  case  no  318/13  by  the  Deputy Commissioner and based on the evidence available on record, it is  established  that  Accused  persons  (1)  Khushboo  (2) Dharampal (3)  Smt. Sushila (4)  Hawa Singh have committed

8

offence under section 306 IPC. Accused Smt. Khushboo W/o Brijesh  Singh  D/o  Dharampal  Singh  caste  Bawaria,  Age  25 years, Sushila W/o Shri Dharampal Singh caste Bawaria, Age 43 years and Dharampal Sing S/o late Shri Ram Singh caste Bawaria, Age 45 years were arrested in this case.  Remaining enquiry.  Accused Hawa Singh could not be arrested since he was absconding and since 8.8.2014, the Hon’ble High Court has stayed the investigation.  

The Status Report of facts is being sent to you.  (emphasis supplied)

13. In light of the fact that the enquiry was pending and there are

aspects which may require investigation, we are of the considered

opinion that  the High Court erred in quashing the FIR at  the

threshold itself without allowing the investigation to proceed. We

cannot  agree  with  the  reasons  provided  under  the  impugned

judgment  concerning  certain  factual  assertions  made  by  the

Respondents as to the condition of the deceased and reasons for

committing suicide because acceptance of the said would not be

in consonance with the settled jurisprudence under Section 482

of CrPC as laid down by various judgments of this Court.  

14. It would be relevant to note that any observation made herein

should not be taken as observations on merits and we direct the

investigative authority as well as the court to consider the matter

on its own merits uninfluenced by any observation herein.

9

15. Therefore, we set aside the impugned judgment and direct the

investigative  authorities  to  complete  the  investigation  with

promptness and to take it to its logical conclusion. Accordingly,

these appeals are allowed.  

...……………………..J.                                                           (N. V. RAMANA)

………………………..J.                                                               (S. ABDUL NAZEER)

NEW DELHI APRIL 09, 2018

10

ITEM NO.1501               COURT NO.9               SECTION II                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal Nos.515-516/2018 @ Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)  No(s). 6453-6454/2015 MUNSHIRAM                                          Petitioner(s)                                 VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR. ETC.                   Respondent(s) ([ HEARD BY : HON. N.V. RAMANA AND HON. S. ABDUL NAZEER, JJ. ]) Date : 09-04-2018 These matters were called on for pronouncement of judgment today. For Petitioner(s)                     Mr. Manish K. Bishnoi, AOR

Mr. Devansh Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Ila Haldia, Adv.                    

For Respondent(s)                     Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR                     Mr. Avinash Kumar, AOR                     

Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana pronounced the judgment of the Bench  comprising  His  Lordship  and  Hon'ble  Mr.  Justice  S.  Abdul Nazeer.

Leave granted. The  appeals  are  allowed  in  terms  of  the  signed  reportable

judgment.  

(SUKHBIR PAUL KAUR)                              (RENUKA SADANA)      AR CUM PS                                   ASST.REGISTRAR

(Signed reportable judgment is placed on the file)