Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh (Sister Of The Deceased) vs Chhattisgarh

Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate Ms. Binu Sharma, Panel Lawyer 2 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 12/03/2025

1. This crmp has been preferred by the present petitioner under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 for quashment of closure report submitted by Respondent no. 1 under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Respondent no. 1. Also seeking intervention of this court to direct the respondents to inform the petitioner or her parents regarding the case as they are neither supplying any documents to the petitioner nor informing anything about the case.

2. The case in nutshell is such that the deceased Rani Thakur who is the sister of the present petitioner performed inter caste marriage with respondent no. 4 on 21.09.2022. On

22.05.2024 husband of the deceased informed the police that his wife has committed suicide. Respondent no. 3 reached the crime scene and merg was recorded as 29/2024 under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the same day. Post mortem was conducted and the report stated that she died due to cardiopulm arrest due to asphyxia as a result of hanging.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the closure report submitted before the respondent no. 1 by respondent no. 2 is not empowered under the law. The statements of the parents and neighbor has not been appreciated by the respondent no. 1 to 3 and they have come to conclusion that no offence has been made out against any person and the 3 present case is of suicide whereby the prosecution agency must have applied their mind as to why a person would commit suicide without any rhyme and reasons. Moreover the respondents never informed the petitioner and her parents regarding the case and they neither supplied any documents to the petitioner or her parents. Therefore, he pleads to quash the closure report dated 10.09.2024 and further pleads to direct the respondent no. 1 to 3 to supply the documents to the petitioner related to the present case and investigate the case.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the impugned report as well as other documents available on record with utmost circumspection.

6. The present petitioner in her statement (Annexure A/5) has stated that after the marriage of the deceased(her sister), she and the deceased used to talk to each other sometimes on phone and during one of the call conversation the deceased told her that her mother in law used to scold her on silly things. Later she came to know from the in-laws of the deceased that the deceased died due to suicide by hanging herself. This statement of the present petitioner is supported by her father, mother and uncle. Further the mother, father and uncle of the deceased stated that the mother in law and 4 the deceased was having a bitter relation, which they came to know from one of the neighbor of the deceased.

7. However, the in-laws of the deceased in their statement stated that the deceased locked herself in the room and when the husband of the deceased tried to knock the door, the deceased didn’t opened the door, thereby he saw from the ventilator that she has hanged herself. This fact has been supported by each and every in-laws of the deceased.

8. On bare perusal of the medical report of the deceased (Annexure A/3) which clearly states that the deceased died due to cardipulm arrest due to asphysio as a result of hanging. Ante mortem in nature and suicidal in nature.

9. Moreover the petitioner’s mother father and uncle has pointed out the statement of one of the statement of the deceased’s neighbor Meenu Thakur who in her statement has stated that she got to know about the death of the deceased from the neighbors and also the fact that the deceased and her mother in law used to have frequent quarrels with each other was heard by her from the nearby neighbors. But looking to the facts and circumstances of the case it is pertinent to note that the neighbour Meena Thakur on whose statement the petitioner’s father mother and uncle are relying is itself not trustworthy as she has heard from some other people of the same village. Moreover the medical report of the deceased clearly signifies the cause of the death of the deceased was by hanging. The statements of the in-laws of the deceased 5 does not reflect that there was any quarrel before her suicide and nor was there any other witness who could actually clarify the fact that the deceased was having a tortured life in her in- laws or there was any quarrel before the incident took place. Therefore, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the considered opinion that quashing of the closure report submitted by the respondent to respondent no. 1 by the respondent no. 2 would be illegal and perverse. The present criminal miscellaneous petition is devoid of merits. There is no good ground upon which the closure report could be quashed and the respondents would be directed to go for further investigation and provide all the relevant documents and information regarding the case to the petitioner.

10. Accordingly, the present criminal miscellaneous petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE alfiza