Ajay Kumar v. Ut Chandigarh

IN T

Ajay Kum

U.T. Cha

CORAM

Present:-

NIDHI G

dated 13.3 Police Sta :- THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGA

Criminal Misc.

Date of decision mar Versus andigarh M:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE N

Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Sr. Ad Ms. Aashna Aggarwal, Advo Mr. Vishal Pundir, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Anil Kumar Lamdharia, Chandigarh. GUPTA J. (Oral) The petitioner is seeking an

3.2024 (Annexure P-1) under S ation West, Sector 11, Chandigar On 12.7.2024, this Court had

"Prayer in this petiti Cr.P.C. is for grant of antic in case FIR No.35 dated 13.3 Section 306 IPC, registere Sector 11, Chandigarh.

Learned Senior Coun the petitioner, inter alia, sub been serving in various cap Institute of Medical Educati

JAB AND HARYANA ARH . No. M-31525 of 2024 n :-04.12.2024 …..Petitioner …..Respondent NIDHI GUPTA dvocate with ocate, e Addl. P.P. for UT nticipatory bail in FIR No.35 ection 306 IPC, registered at rh. d passed the following order ion filed under Section 438 cipatory bail to the petitioner

3.2024 (Annexure P-1) under ed at Police Station West, nsel appearing on behalf of bmits that the petitioner has acities in the Post Graduate ion and Research (PGIMER)

Chandigarh for the last 36 petitioner has been working Radiology Department, whic post. Additionally, the peti the Advance Trauma Cen Besides the above duties, the to maintain the stock registe the equipments, et cetera, Emergency sections. The wif been serving in the PGIMER presently posted as Technica

It is submitted that alth posted in the Radiology Dep of the petitioner was diffe inasmuch as, the petitioner cadre as he was a Tutor T Advance Trauma Centre/AT the deceased was of the tech as a Supervisor (Radiograp Advance Pediatric Centre/A Centre/ACC. By virtue of he custodian of all the Radiol her section i.e. APC and ACC

Vide order dated 3 passed by the Head of Diagnosis, upon the ret incumbent, and on the basis was given the charge/ Chief the ultrasound machines and the Department.

Vide order dated circulated to all concerned, the deceased and three othe Department of Radio diagn

6 years.Since 28.08.2012 the g as Tutor Technician in the ch is a teaching assignment itioner was also incharge of ntre (ATC) & Emergency. e petitioner was also required ers, care and maintenance of and sub store of ATC and ife of the petitioner has also R for the past 38 years andis al Assistant. hough the deceased was also partment, however, the cadre ferent from the deceased - r belonged to the teaching Technician, incharge of the TC and Emergency; whereas hnical cadre as she working pher) and was incharge of APC and Advance Cardiac er position, the deceased was logy equipment/machines in C.

30.08.2022 (Annexure P-3) the Department of Radio tirement of the previous s of seniority, the petitioner Technical Office Incharge of d various other equipments in

14.2.2024 (Annexure P-4) including the petitioner and er persons, the Head of the nosis, PGIMER, sought "the

updated list of ultrasound u their serial numbers after p February 2024".

It is submitted that it which the deceased was accounted for. As per the kno deceased had also written t in this regard. As such, the Radio diagnosis & Imaging P a letter dated 23.2.2024 (A providers and vendors of th relevant information/service respect of the ultrasou transducers.

Simultaneously, vide

23.2.2024 (Annexure P-6) directed the petitioner's wife Radiology Section and to t onwards; and the deceased w OPD Radiology Section and from 06.3.2024 onwards.

Ld. Senior Counsel su that after passing of the s (Annexure P-6) and prior to charge from the deceased sent a WhatsApp message da 8) to the petitioner, from w deceased was mentally di charge takeover by the wife o

Learned Senior Coun referred to the judgment Prabhat Kumar Mishra @ State of U.P. &Anr. 2024 A

units along with probes and physical verification by 20th transpired that one probe of custodian, was not being owledge of the petitioner, the to the HOD, Radiology, PGI Head of the Department of PGIMER, Chandigarh wrote Annexure P-5) to the service he said machines to provide e reports to the PGIMER in und machines and their e another order dated 6) HOD, Radiology, PGI fe to move from OPD to APC take charge from 05.3.2024 was transferred from APC to d was directed to take charge ubmits that it is to be noted said order dated 23.2.2024 o the petitioner's wife taking on 05.3.2024, the deceased ated 04.3.2024 (Annexure P-which it was clear that the isturbed even prior to the of the petitioner. nsel for the petitioner has of the Supreme Court in @ Prabhat Mishra vs. The AIR (Supreme Court) 1405,

the relevant para-Nos.22 reproduced as follows :- "xxx xxx

¶22It is prosecuti the suicid deceased On a mi note, we thereof in on the appellant responsib under Sec

¶23We suicide which cle was frust pressure various r to his off feeling th different apprehen suicide imaginati sufficient an act o elements suicide. T are almo Netai Dut hesitation necessary abetment made out hence al appellant offences 306 IPC SC/ST Ac of process xxx xxx

Learned Senior coun placed reliance upon the passed by a co-ordinate Be Kumar @ Sushil Yadav & A

and 23 of the same are x xxx s not in dispute that the on case is entirely based on de note left behind by the before committing suicide. inute perusal of the suicide do not find that the contents ndicate any act or omission part of the accused twhich could make him ble for abetment as defined ction 107 IPC. have minutely perused the note (reproduced supra) early shows that the deceased trated on account of work and was apprehensive of random factors unconnected fficial duties. He was also he pressure of working in two districts. However, such sions expressed in the note, by no stretch of ion, can be considered to attribute to the appellant, or omission constituting the of abetment to commit The facts of the case at hand ost identical to the case of tta (supra). Thus, we have no n in holding that the y ingredients of the offence of to commit suicide are not t from the chargesheet and llowing prosecution of the t is grossly illegal for the punishable under Section and section 3(2)(v) of the ct tantamounts to gross abuse s to law. x xxx" nsel for the petitioner also judgment dated 06.5.2024 ench of this Court in Sushil Another vs. State of Haryana

& Another in CRM-M-4189 of the same, which reads as f "xxx xxx

¶13A aforemen show tha there mu link betw subsequen instigatio or comm accused m subsequen commit abetment, involveme instigate imperativ act on the instigate suicide. F in a su establish until the i made out. xxx xxx

Learned Senior Coun grant of interim relief to th that the petitioner will join operate with the Investigating

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Lamdharia, Addl. P.P. for U on behalf of respondent-UT Ishar, Advocate has put in complainant and filed Powe on record.

Vide last order dated directed the respondent-UT Report in the matter. In com the UT Chandigarh has fil

91-2023 and refers to para 13 follows :- x xxx perusal of the tioned judgments would at to constitute abetment, ust be a proximate and live ween the occurrence and the nt suicide inasmuch as the on or illegal act of omission mission at the hands of the must be the only factor which ntly led the deceased to suicide. To constitute , the intention and ent of an accused to aid or the commission of suicide is ve. There must be a positive e part of an accused to aid or the deceased to commit Further, merely being named icide would not by itself the culpability of an accused ingredients of an offence are . x xxx" nsel, accordingly, prays for he petitioner and undertakes n the investigation and co-g Agency. Court, Mr. Anil Kumar UT Chandigarh accepts notice Chandigarh; and Mr. H.P.S. n appearance on behalf of r of Attorney, which is taken d 05.7.2024 this Court had T Chandigarh to file Status mpliance, learned counsel for led the Status Report dated

12.7.2024 by way of affidavi Superintendent of Police Chandigarh. The same is ta is supplied to the counsel opp

Learned counsel Chandigarh with the assista the complainant/husband of prayer made on behalf of pe

05.3.2024 when wife of the p in the Advanced Pediatrics was accompanying his wif humiliated and harassed the that she committed suicide that it is for this reason that named the petitioner in her that the question should be petitioner has been named by note? From the above, it i has a role to play in the s accordingly he should not b pre-arrest bail as his cust much required. It is how Counsel that, although it has in the suicide note that she last days, bu information/message/compla deceased in this regard to th his wife, had at any time admitted that the suicide note

Learned counsel for although the house and t petitioner have been raided a clue of the petitioner has bee that therefore, the petitioner

it of Gurmukh Singh, Deputy e, Sub-Division Central, ken on record. Copy thereof posite. for the respondent-UT ance of learned counsel for f the deceased opposes the etitioner and submits that on petitioner went to take charge Centre (APC) the petitioner ife and they both together e deceased to such an extent on 11.3.2024.It is submitted the deceased has specifically suicide note.It is contended e asked as to why only the by the deceased in the suicide is evident that the petitioner uicide of the deceased, and be granted the concession of todial interrogation is very wever, admitted by learned s been stated by the deceased was under pressure for the ut there was aint received from the he effect that the petitioner or e, harassed her. It is also e is undated. the UT further submits that the official address of the at various times, however, no en found so far. It is argued is evading arrest.

Learned counsel for th the prayer made on behalf of submits that the petitioner a embezzling equipments from regard they were instigating the record, because of which and was ultimately forced submitted that even after r petitioner and his wife are t and are obstructing the proc that previously also an FIR petitioner but being an influ has 'managed' the said FIR However, no details are forth

I have heard learned gone through the case file ca is 11.3.2024. The present FI

13.3.2024 on the basis of st husband of the deceased, w persons as accused including and one unknown accused i.e

It has been argued o that the deceased was haras wife when the wife went to has been submitted that it petitioner has been named in it is my view that the dece disturbance even prior to the charge of the APC Section from the following WhatsAp (Annexure P-8) sent by the wherein she has talked of d fact, she has sought help from

he complainant also opposes of petitioner and additionally and his wife are involved in m the PGIMER and in this g the deceased to tamper with h she was mentally harassed d to commit suicide.It is registration of the FIR the tampering with the evidence cess of law. It is also alleged R was registered against the uential person, the petitioner R with the police authorities. hcoming in this regard. counsel for the parties and arefully. The date of incident FIR came to be registered on tatement of even date of the where in he has named six g the petitioner and his wife, e. total seven accused. on behalf of the respondents ssed by the petitioner and his take charge on 5.3.2024. It is for this reason that the n the suicide note. However, eased had exhibited mental e wife of the petitioner taking on 5.3.2024. This is evident pp message dated 04.3.2024 e deceased to the petitioner death, of taking VRS, and in m the petitioner.

"Good m sir if I please co do anyth peacefully anymore for sake o out of thi you will when I w the time t out any i out from to continu with out not sleep sleep with out from time! Say kerahu h Want to l peacefully If possibl can sleep till 7.3.24

In the suicide note th that she was 'under pressur that the petitioner is 'resp However, as noted above, learned counsel for the resp information/message/compla from the deceased to the eff wife, had harassed her. Eve nowhere stated that the hu allegedly over 10 days, w Moreover, the suicide no recovered from the complain two days after the incident.

It is the prima facie v essential ingredients of the IPC are: (i) the abetment accused to aid or instigate

orning sir I am in great pain do anything good for you onsider it and forgive me if I ing wrong so pl let me go y I don't want to continue I quit it I don't want to die of God make me free to move is game.you always says that help me and stands by me will be in problem so this is to help me so let me go with issue please please help me this hard time l don't want, ue I want my VRS let me go any enquiry please.I could the whole night sir I want to hout any stress so bring me this hard time this is the last y you something asea na ho he na may kush kehnay ko! live for my kids so let me go. y thanks. le give me leave today so I p Sir Arun sir is also on leave

4." he deceased has also stated re for the last 10 days' and ponsible for my condition'. it has been admitted by spondents that there was no aint received at any time fect that the petitioner or his en in the status report, it is umiliation of the deceased, was witnessed by anyone. ote is undated; and was nant/husband of the deceased view of this Court that 'The e offence under section 306 t; (ii) the intention of the or abetting the deceased to

commit suicide. The act insulting the deceased by u not, by itself, constitute the should be evidence capab accused intended by such ac commit suicide. Unles instigation/abetment to com accused cannot be convicte Reference: M. Arjunan vers Inspector of Police, (2019) 3

It is also relevant t mental process of instigatin adding a person in doing of act on the part of the acc committing suicide, convic ……… there has to be a cl offence. It also requires an a led the disease to commit sui been intended to push the d that he committed suicide". R Kumar Mahajan and anothe

In any event, the ma investigation. In view of the out at this stage to deny the bail to the petitioner.Bail, no by the Hon'ble Supreme Cou State of Rajasthan, Jaipur Finder Doc Id # 105856.

Adjourned to 04.12.20

In the meantime, th appear before the SHO/In investigation and in the eve released on interim bail on the satisfaction of SHO/Inve

of the accused, however, using abusive language will e abetment of suicide. There ble of suggesting that the ct to instigate the deceased to ss the ingredients of mmit suicide are satisfied, ed under section 306 IPC." sus State, represented by its 3 SCC 315. that: "Abetment involves a ng a person or intentionally f a thing. Without a positive cused to instigate or aid in ction cannot be sustained. lear mens reato commit the active act or direct act which icide …… that act must have deceased into such a position Reference: SSG versus Vijay er (2010) 12 SCC 190. atter is still at the stage of e above, no ground is made e concession of anticipatory ot jail, is the rule expounded urt in the landmark ruling in r v. Balchand, (SC) : Law

¶024e petitioner is directed to nvestigating Officer to join ent of his arrest, he shall be his furnishing bail bonds to estigating Agency subject to

complianc investigat Investigat Court, rep

24.7.2024 interim ba stipulated the following conditions a 438(2) Cr.P.C.:-

i) that the p available Investigat required ;

ii) that the p or indire threat or acquainte so as t disclosing to any po

iii) that the p country, the Cour passport,

Meanwhile, State cou affidavit as to the exact role the details of pending FIRs, date of hearing.

It is, however, made cl in above shall be construe opinion on the merits of the m Learned counsel for the ce of the afore said order, th tion. Learned State counsel, o ting Officer states that in terms produced above, the petitioner ha 4 and is cooperating. In view of the above, the ord ail to the petitioner is made abso However, the petitioner sh d under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C

as envisaged under Section petitioner shall make himself for interrogation before the ting Officer as and when ; petitioner shall not, directly ectly, make any inducement, r promise to any person ed with the facts of the case to dissuade him/her from g such facts to the Court or lice officer ; petitioner shall not leave the without prior permission of rt and shall surrender his if any. unsel is directed to file an e of the petitioner alongwith if any, on or before the next lear, that nothing stated here ed to be an expression of matter." petitioner submits that in he petitioner has joined the on instructions from the s of the order passed by this as joined the investigation on der dated 12.7.2024 granting lute. all abide by the conditions C. He shall also join the

investigat required f the inves investigat this Court

December Vijay Asija

Whether spe Whether Rep

tion and cooperate with the inves for the same in future as and whe In case at any given point of stigating agency that the peti tion but is not cooperating, they t for passing appropriate orders. The petition stands disposed r 04, 2024

eaking/reasoned Yes / No portable Yes / No

stigating agency in case he is en called upon to do so. f time hereinafter, it is felt by itioner is required for the will be at liberty to approach

of. ( NIDHI GUPTA )

JUDGE