Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2025:CGHC:43897-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 619 of 2023 1 - Abhishek Pal S/o Prabhanshu Pal @ Khokan Aged About 27 Years R/o Royal Town Colony Raj Kishore Nagar Mopka, P.S. Sarkanda, Bilaspur District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Abha Pal W/o Prabhanshu Pal @ Khokan Aged About 57 Years R/o Royal Town Colony Raj Kishore Nagar Mopka, P.S. Sarkanda Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. versus ... Petitioners 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chirmiri, District - Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (Earlier Koriya) Chhattisgarh. 2 - Manoj Dey @ Bablu S/o Late Vijay Gopal Dey Aged About 46 Years R/o Hospital Dafai, Haldibadi, Chirmiri, Police Station District Manendragarh - Chirmiri - Bharatpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Shailednra Sharma, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Anil Gulati, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Decision
Order on Board 29.08.2025 1. Heard Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shailendra Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the State/respondent No.1 and Mr. Anil Gulati, learned 2 counsel, appearing for respondent No.2 / complainant. 2. The present petition under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, ‘CrPC’) has been filed by the petitioners seeking following prayer :- “It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be kind enough to set-aside / quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner in Crime No. 0632/2022 in Police Station : Chirmiri, District : Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (Earlier Koriya) (C.G.), in the interest of justice. Any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be made.” 3. The case of prosecution, in brief, is that from 23.03.2022 to 24.03.2022, the complainant's niece deceased namely Falguni Pal went to sleep around 10 P.M. due to headache and around 3:15 AM, the complainant's elder sister found that deceased had hanged herself from the Iron pipe of the Pooja room. Further it has been stated by the complainant that the deceased's marriage which was supposed to be held on 16.02.2022 was postponed due to sudden demise of the father of the groom and complainant further stated that the deceased committed suicide because her marriage was cancelled. However, the police authority found a suicide note of the deceased and as per the suicide note & other evidences, the police authority has concluded in the investigation that the present petitioners namely Abhishek Pal and his Mother Abha Pal harassed the deceased to which she committed suicide 3 and thereafter, an FIR has been registered at Police Station, Chirmiri, District - Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur bearing Crime No. 623/22 on 18.11.2022 against the alleged accused Abhishek Pal and Abha Pal for the offence punishable u/s 306 of I.P.C and thereafter chargesheet was filed on 08.01.2023 by the concerned Police Station. Hence, this petition. 4. Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioners that the entire story is concocted and baseless, arbitrary and actuated from the malice for the reason that as per the entire story of the prosecution, the incident took place in the intervening night of 23.03.2022 to 24.03.2022, however the police authority has registered F.LR. much later on 18.11.2022, almost after 8 months, hence there is sufficient delay in the registration of the FIR which shows that the allegation against the petitioners is false and fabricated. Furthermore, on careful perusal of the F.I.R. dated: 18.11.2022 it can be observed that the deceased was mentally disturbed for the reason that, her marriage was going to be solemnized with Akash Das, but unfortunately his father passed away due to which the marriage got stopped and thereafter the deceased got mentally disturbed. Further, nothing in the contents of the F.I.R. it has been stated that petitioner have any role of instigating the deceased in committing the suicide. He also submitted that the petitioner No. 2 (mother of Abhishek Pal) has been falsely implicated in the case without there being any nexus between act of the petitioner No. 2 and the alleged offence under 4 Section 306 of I.P.C. and due to which the petitioner No. 2 is getting harassed for no fault of her own. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Abhinav Mohan Delkar Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Others (Criminal Appeal Nos. 2177-2185 of 2024) decided on 18.08.2025. 5. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent opposes this petition and submits that though the incident took place in the intervening night of 23.03.2022 and 24.03.2022 and Merg Intimation was lodged by the complainant wherein it has been stated that his niece deceased namely Falguni Pal went to sleep around 10 P.M. due to headache and around 3:15 AM, the complainant's elder sister found that deceased had hanged herself from the Iron pipe of the Pooja room, further it has been stated by the complainant that the deceased's marriage which was supposed to be held on 16.02.2022 was postponed due to sudden demise of the father of the groom and complainant further stated that the deceased committed suicide because her marriage was cancelled, but during the course of investigation, the police authority found a suicide note of the deceased and as per the suicide note & other evidences, the police authority has concluded in the investigation that the present petitioners namely Abhishek Pal and his Mother Abha Pal harassed the deceased to which she committed suicide and thereafter, an FIR has been registered at Police Station, 5 Chirmiri, District - Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur bearing Crime No. 623/22 on 18.11.2022 against the alleged accused Abhishek Pal and Abha Pal for the offence punishable u/s 306 of I.P.C and thereafter chargesheet was filed on 08.01.2023 by the concerned Police Station. He also submitted that suicidal note of the deceased was also got examined by the Handwriting Expert, who has opined and verified that handwriting of the note written in the suicidal note was of the deceased Falguni Pal. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 7. In Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Apex Court has observed that the power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection in the rarest of rare cases. While examining an F.I.R./complaint, quashing of which is sought, the Court cannot inquire about the reliability, genuineness, or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R./complaint. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but conferment of wide power requires the Court to be cautious. The Apex Court has emphasized that though the Court has the power to quash the F.I.R. in suitable cases, the Court, when it exercises power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., only has to consider whether or not the allegations of F.I.R. disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and is not required to consider the case on merit. 8. It has been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, 6 that the proceedings relating to cognizable ofences cannot be interfered except on certain grounds enumerated by the Apex Court in the said judgment. It is evident that, none of the grounds mentioned by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said judgment are attracted in the present case. In State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani & others reported in (2017) 2 SCC 779, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, if the information given clearly mentions the commission of cognizable ofence, there is no other option but to register an FIR forthwith. Other considerations are not relevant at the stage of registration of FIR. Also what is to be seen is merely whether the information given ex facie discloses commission of a cognizable offence. 9. From perusal of the contents of the FIR as well as in the charge- sheet, it transpires that the incident took place in the intervening night of 23.03.2022 and 24.03.2022 and Merg Intimation was lodged by the complainant on 24.03.2022 itself, wherein it has been stated that his niece deceased namely Falguni Pal went to sleep around 10 P.M. due to headache and around 3:15 AM, the complainant's elder sister found that deceased had hanged herself from the Iron pipe of the Pooja room, further it has been stated by the complainant that the deceased's marriage which was supposed to be held on 16.02.2022 was postponed due to sudden demise of the father of the groom and complainant further stated that the deceased committed suicide because her marriage was cancelled, but during the course of investigation, the police 7 authority seized a suicide note of the deceased from the possession of the mother of the deceased on 18.04.2022, wherein specific allegations have been made against the petitioner No.1 Abhishek Pal and his Mother Abha Pal (petitioner No.2) for torching and harassment, due to which the deceased committed suicide. Furthermore, chargesheet was filed on 08.01.2023 by the concerned Police Station and suicidal note of the deceased was also got examined by the Handwriting Expert, who has opined and verified that handwriting of the note written in the suicidal note was of the deceased Falguni Pal. 10. The petitioners will have every opportunity before the learned Trial Court to rebut the allegations levelled against them. This Court cannot examine or appreciate the evidences that may be led before the learned Trial Court and stalling the trial would be wholly unjustified. Further, in light of what has been said by the Supreme Court in Bhajanlal (supra) and Habib Abdullah Jeelani (supra), there appears to be no good ground for quashing of the charge- sheet. 11. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed. 12. Interim order granted by this Court stands vacated. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra