GUDURU SAMBASIVA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(APH)-1999-11-40
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on November 12,1999

GUDURU SAMBASIVA RAO Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

PALLEM DENIEL VICTOR ALIAS VICTOR HANTER VS. STATE OF A P [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The petitioner/A2 filed application under Section 227 Cr.PC for discharge. He and three others were charged for the offence punishable under Section 306 IPC. The deceased was working as a paid Secretary in the Pellerlamudi Agricultural Co-operative Society. A1 is the President of the said Society. A2 is landlord and A4 is working as a clerk in the said Society. It is alleged that the deceased had misappropriated the amounts of the Society to the tune of Rs.7 lakhs. He stated that he gave some amounts unauthorisedly to A1, A2, A3 and A4, The Zonal Manager inspected the office on 17-8-1994 and directed them to maintain records upto date. In the night the deceased committed suicide leaving his dying declaration. In the dying declaration, he stated that he gave monies to the accused and they did not repay and therefore he is committing suicide.
(2.)In this case, there is no nexus between the Act of non-payment by the accused and the Act of suicide committed by the deceased. There is no allegation of intentional aiding or intentional abetting the deceased to commit suicide by the accused, to bring the offence within the ambit of Section 306 IPC or for that matter under Section 107 IPC. In this context, the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in Pattern Daniel Victor @ Victor Hanter and others v. State ofAndhra Pradesh Represented By Public Prosecutor, 1997 (1) ALT (Crl) 124, is relevant. In that case, it was held as follows: "3. A perusal of the charge-sheet shows that there was no mention as to when the accused-petitioners threatened the deceased with the dire consequences and how they abetted the deceased in commit suicide. The opinion of the handwriting expert is based on the specimen handwriting of the deceased only, but not basing on the admitted handwriting of the deceased as it is not possible to obtain the admitted handwriting of the deceased. Moreover the allegations in the charge-sheet do not show how the accused-petitioners have intentionally aided the deceased to commit suicide. To attract the ingredients of abetment, the intention of the accused-petitioners to aid or instigate or abet the deceased is necessary. Mere non-payment of the debt by the deceased is not a sufficient proof to attribute the intention of abetment to the accused-petitioners. Therefore the proceedings against the accused petitioners under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code have to be quashed. Accordingly the petition is allowed and the proceedings in PRC No.20 of 1996 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kaikalur against the accused-petitioners herein are hereby quashed."
(3.)The facts in the above case are similar to the facts of he present case. The action of the accused in not repaying the loans, even if it is correct, it does not constitute any instigation for the deceased to commit suicide. Therefore, certainly the petitioner/A2 has to be discharged. Hence, he is discharged.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.