ABHISHEKH PUSHKAR Vs. STATE OF U P
LAWS(ALL)-2009-5-801
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on May 06,2009

ABHISHEKH PUSHKAR Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

JOGINDER KUMAR VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
AMARAWATI VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Ravindra Singh, Naheed Ara Moonis - (1.)THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Abhishekh Pushkar with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, quashing the F.I.R. of Case Crime No. 217 of 2009 under Section 306, I.P.C., P. S. Link Road, district Ghaziabad and its further investigation. The next prayer is to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in the above mentioned case or to pass any order which is deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
(2.)THE facts in brief of this case are that the F.I.R. of this case has been lodged by respondent No. 3 Pankaj Kumar Agrahari on 15.4.2009 at 8.15 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 15.4.2009 after 3.18 p.m. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that the deceased Km. Sarika Agrahari, the niece of the respondent No. 3 was student of B.Tech. IV year (E.C. Branch) of Indraprastha Engineering College, Site-IV, Sahibabad and she was inmate of the girl hostel of the college where she was residing in room No. 315. THE deceased gave a telephonic message to respondent No. 3 on 15.4.2009 at 3.18 p.m. to bring to lock and rupees, thereafter the respondent No. 3 came to the Indraprastha college to meet the deceased and he tried to contact by his mobile phone with the deceased from the guard room of the college but calls sent by the respondent No. 3 of the deceased's mobile phone were unattended. It was informed by him to warden and guard of the college. THEreafter Smt. Suman, the warden and guard of the college went to the room of the deceased and came back who informed that her room was closed from in side. THEreafter the net of the adjoining room was broken from where it was seen that the deceased was in a hanging condition, then her room was opened and found the deceased in a hanging condition, a suicide note was kept on her bed, in which it was written that the petitioner Abhishekh Pushkar had played with her modesty (Izzat). THE first informant respondent No. 3 was informed earlier also by the deceased that the petitioner Abhishekh Pushkar was harassing her unnecessarily, the petitioner Abhisekh Pushkar was student of M.E. of the college. THE deceased was unnecessarily harassed by the petitioner due to which she was mentally disturbed and committed suicide. Being aggrieved from the F.I.R. lodged against the petitioner the present writ petition has been filed.
Heard Sri Virendra Bhatia, senior advocate assisted by Sri Vijay Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government advocate for the State of U. P.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner :

1. That the petitioner has passed B. Tech examination from Indraprashta Engineering College in the year 2008, he was looking for further studies. In view of his brilliance, decency, sincerity he got the job offer from reputed company "'WIPRO" when he was student of B.Tech III year. He is having very good academic career. He belongs to highly reputed family, his father is retired Professor from Chandra Shekhar Azad Agricultural University, Kanpur, his mother is retired Lecturer, his two sisters are highly qualified. The petitioner belongs to family of academician and research scholars.

2. The petitioner was having no relationship with the deceased. She was never harassed or tortured by the petitioner. No such complaint was made by her to her parents, college adminis-tration or any other authority. The deceased was student of B.Tech. IV year, she has committed suicide due to other reasons including the reason that she was very poor student, her attendance in the college was only 45% and in internal examination of the college, she had obtained only 10% marks and she was not selected in campus replacement due to which she was depressed such reporting has been made in daily newspaper Dainik Bhasker etc., dated 18.4.2009.

3. After the death of the deceased several news items were published in the newspapers in which it was written that suicide note was containing certain allegations as she was having the suspicion that the camera was fitted in the bath room of the college, through that camera her photographs would have been obtained by the petitioner but in support of such allegation nothing incriminating was recovered by the police or college administration even no camera etc., was recovered. All these allegations were made on the basis of the doubt and suspicion.

4. The contents of the suicide note were published in daily newspaper "Amar Ujala" published from New Delhi dated 17.4.2009 which reads as under, "Main Sarika Agrahari (B.Tech. IV year) student main apni maut apni marji se kar rahi hoon meri maut ke bad mere pariwar walon ko koi bhi kutch na kahe meri maut ka jimmedar Abhishekh Pushkar (ME passout last year pass hai usne meri ijjat ke sath khilwar kiya hai mere marne ke bad use ceiling ke bathroom main camera lagane tatha ek ladki nahate hui dekhane ke jurm main fansi (Maut ke) saja ho".
The above mentioned suicide note is not genuine even it was not having the signature of the deceased. The story of recovery of the suicide note appears to be concocted, its genuineness is highly doubtful because the deceased was student of English medium but the suicide note was written in Hindi language ; The stories of suicide published in the different newspapers on different dates are contradicting to each other. In such circumstances, no reliance can be placed on the F.I.R. version ; The petitioner is innocent, he has not committed any offence and there is no material suggesting his participation in commission of the alleged offence even on the basis of the allegation made in the F.I.R. no offence under Section 306, I.P.C. is made out ; The petitioner is having a bright career in case he has been sent to jail without having evidence, his career will be spoiled ; and Even on the basis of the allegation made in the F.I.R. no offence under Section 306 is made out, therefore, the F.I.R. and its investigation may be quashed and the petitioner may not be arrested in the present case.
(3.)IN reply of the above contention, it is submitted by learned Government advocate that it is a case in which the deceased had committed suicide, she was student of B. Tech IV year, she was living in a room of the college's hostel. According to the suicide note the petitioner has played with the modesty of the deceased, the suicide note discloses the name of the petitioner as an accused. The detailed evidence relating to contents of the suicide note may be collected during investigation. But it is very clear that the deceased was compelled by the petitioner to commit suicide. The allegation made in the F.I.R. are constituting the offence punishable under Section 306, I.P.C. which is cognizable offence. At this stage the news items published in the different newspapers on different dates in respect of the death of the deceased are having no relevance and there is no ground for quashing the F.I.R. and its investigation. The present petition is devoid of merit, the same may be dismissed.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government advocate and from the perusal of the record including the F.I.R. it appears that the allegations made in the F.I.R. prima facie discloses the commission of the cognizable offence. The F.I.R. is not Encyclopaedia of the facts and circumstances, the same may be collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation. So far as constitution of the offence under Section 306, I.P.C. is concerned, prima facie it is made out on the basis of the allegations made in the impugned F.I.R., the allegations are disclosing the commission of a cognizable offence and there is no ground for quashing the F.I.R. and its investigation, therefore, the prayer for quashing the F.I.R. and its investigation is refused.



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