HARDIKBHAI HASHMUKHBHAI BAROT vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Court: Gujarat High Court
Case type: CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION
Decided on: 24-03-2026

<div> R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 19793 of 2021 With R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 22035 of 2021 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER ========================================================== </div><table><thead><tr><th>Approved for Reporting</th><th>Yes</th><th>No</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td></td><td>YES</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table><div> HARDIKBHAI HASHMUKHBHAI BAROT & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance in Criminal Misc. Application No.19793 of 2021 ABATED for the Applicant(s) No. 2 JUCKY LUCKY CHAN(8033) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,3,4 DARSHIT R BRAHMBHATT(8011) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MS VRUNDA SHAH, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 Appearance in Criminal Misc. Application No.22035 of 2021 MR EKANT AHUJA for the Applicant(s) No. 1 DARSHIT R BRAHMBHATT(8011) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR RONAK RAVAL, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== </div><table><thead><tr><th>CORAM:</th><th>HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER</th></tr></thead><tbody></tbody></table><div> Date : 24/03/2026 COMMON JUDGMENT 1 The present application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment Page 1 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 of the FIR registered with Jetpur City Police Station, Rajkot Rural, being I-C.R. No.11213022211360 of 2021 dated 07.10.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code against five accused. Out of the said accused, accused No.2, namely Hasmukhlal Amrutlal Barot, has expired during the pendency of the present application, and therefore, the proceedings qua him stand abated. 2 As per the allegations made in the FIR, the accused persons, in connivance with each other, had instigated the deceased to commit suicide by filing false cases against him. It is further alleged that the deceased left a suicide note in a Creta car, wherein the names of all the accused persons, along with their mobile numbers and their respective roles in instigating the deceased, were mentioned. 3 Heard learned advocates Ekant Ahuja and Mr.J.L.Chan for the applicants, learned APP Mr. Ronak Raval for respondent-State and learned advocate Mr. Darshit Brahmbhatt for respondent No.2. 4 Learned advocate Mr. Ahuja submits that prior to the present FIR, an FIR being No.11216009210509 came Page 2 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 to be lodged on 03.09.2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 114 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code against the deceased as well as his family members. It is submitted that as per the allegations in the said FIR, which was lodged by one Mr. Manharbhai @ Tanabhai, who is arraigned as accused No.3 in the present impugned FIR, under the pretext of developing an industrial park, the deceased and his family members had collected substantial amounts from villagers belonging to the same community, and thereafter failed to fulfill their promises and allegedly siphoned off an amount of Rs.3,81,50,000/-. It is further submitted by the learned advocate Mr. Ajuha that the present applicant, along with his brothers, was arrested in connection with the said FIR, and the father of the deceased expired in custody. It is submitted that when the deceased committed suicide, he had been released on temporary bail and was required to surrender on 09.10.2021; however, he committed suicide on 06.10.2021. 4.1 Learned advocate Mr. Ahuja submits that there is no proximate link between the alleged act of instigation and the commission of suicide. It is contended that accused No.3 had merely initiated recovery proceedings by lodging a complaint, and the same has been projected as instigation to commit suicide Page 3 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 by the deceased. It is further submitted that even the references made to each of the accused in the FIR do not disclose any act of instigation; rather, the FIR lodged for the offences under Section 420 and other allied provisions, pursuant to which the deceased was arrested and suspended from service, appears to be the real cause for the suicide. It is submitted by the learned advocate Mr. Ajuha none of the ingredients of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code are satisfied, and in the absence of the same, continuation of proceedings under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 4.2 Placing reliance upon the decisions of the Apex Court in the cases of Abhinav Mohan Delkar vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. , reported in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 812 , Mohit Singhal & Anr. vs. State of Uttarakhand & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No.3578 of 2023), as well as the judgment rendered by this Court in Pavan Maheshbhai Sharma vs. State of Gujarat & Anr. (Criminal Misc. Application No.18933 of 2020), learned advocate Mr. Ahuja submits that where the deceased commits suicide due to pressure from creditors for repayment of amounts collected by him and his family members, such circumstances cannot be construed as intentional instigation by the applicants so as to attract criminal liability. In that Page 4 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 view of the matter, it is prayed that the impugned FIR be quashed by allowing the present application. 5 Learned advocate Mr. Darshit Brahmbhatt appearing for the complainant has submitted that since the charge-sheet has not yet been filed, the question as to whether the applicant had instigated the deceased to commit suicide cannot be examined at this stage. It is submitted that whether there existed the requisite mens rea or intention on the part of the applicant is a matter to be determined during trial, and at this stage, when the investigation is still pending, such examination would be beyond the scope of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In that background, it is prayed that the present application be dismissed. 6 Learned APP Mr. Ronak Raval appearing for the State has submitted that the suicide note written by the deceased has been confirmed by the handwriting expert, and in addition thereto, the statements of the family members of the deceased also support the allegations made in the FIR. It is submitted by the learned APP Mr. Raval that even if there is no specific reference to a particular incident, considering the overall allegations made in the FIR, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the Page 5 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 present applicant. Learned APP Mr. Raval has further submitted that the investigation has been stalled on account of the protection granted by this Court and, in that background, interference at this stage would be premature. It is, therefore, prayed that the present application be dismissed. 7 Having considered the submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties and on perusal of the allegations made in the FIR, it emerges that the deceased, namely Sanjay, was arraigned as an accused in an FIR lodged at the instance of Manharbhai Rognath Barot on 03.09.2021. It further emerges that the family members of the deceased had borrowed an amount of approximately Rs.3,81,00,000/- from villagers under the assurance of developing an industrial park, however, as the said promises could not be fulfilled, the complainant along with other affected persons resorted to legal recourse by lodging the said FIR. Pursuant to the registration of the said FIR, the father and brother of the deceased, along with the deceased himself, were arrested, and the father expired in custody on 24.09.2021. Owing to the death of the father, temporary bail was granted to the brother of the deceased as well as to the deceased for the period from 11.09.2021 to 24.09.2021. The deceased was Page 6 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 required to surrender on 09.10.2021; however, prior thereto, he committed suicide. 8 At this stage, reference of section 107 as well as 306 of the Indian Penal Code is required to be made: “107. Abetment of a thing.— A person abets the doing of a thing, who— (First) — Instigates any person to do that thing; or (Secondly) — Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or (Thirdly) — Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Explanation 1.— A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. Explanation 2.— Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.” 306. Abetment of suicide.— If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.” Page 7 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 8.1 Abetment is defined under Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the said provision, a person abets the doing of a thing when he instigates any person to do an act or engages in a conspiracy for the doing of that act, or intentionally aids the doing of that act. In the present context, if a person instigates the deceased to commit suicide, or intentionally aids or conspires in the commission of such act, it can be said that such person has abetted the commission of suicide by the deceased. 8.2 The essential ingredients of offence under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code is abetment and the intention of accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide. 8.3 It is true that, at the stage of exercising powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this Court cannot enter into the question as to whether the first respondent had the requisite intention to instigate, aid, or abet the commission of suicide. However, a mere allegation of harassment, without any positive act on the part of the accused in close proximity to the time of occurrence that could have led the deceased to commit suicide, would not be sufficient to sustain a charge under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 9 On examining the role attributed to the accused Page 8 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 persons, it emerges that accused No.1, namely Gaurang, is alleged to have instigated the lodging of the FIR under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No.2 has expired. Accused No.3, who is the complainant of the said FIR under Section 420, is alleged to be a member of a group which initiated proceedings to recover the amount. Accused No.4 is stated to have issued a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in respect of dishonour of a cheque amounting to Rs.45,00,000/- issued by the deceased. Accused No.5, namely Hardik, is an advocate who is alleged to have assisted the complainant in lodging the FIR. 10 The allegation made by the deceased is to the effect that they are responsible for criminal proceedings initiated by filing the FIR. It is not the case where the accused had by his acts of omission or by continuous course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case and instigation may have been inferred. Live-link which is essential to connect the occurrence of any incident with commission of suicide is missing. There is no reference of any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led the person to commit suicide. Page 9 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 11 On a bare reading of the allegations, there is no specific date of occurrence indicating that any instigation or aiding was made by the accused persons on any particular date or in relation to any specific incident. The FIR, in essence, reflects only the consequences arising out of the earlier FIR registered under Sections 409, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, which, by itself, cannot be construed as an act of instigation or abetment leading the deceased to commit suicide. 12 This Court has referred to the decision of the Apex Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 , wherein the Apex Court has laid down the guidelines governing the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which are reproduced hereinbelow: “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we have given the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently Page 10 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (i) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (ii) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (iii) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (iv) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (v) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (vi) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the Page 11 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026 R/CR.MA/19793/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/03/2026 institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (vii) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 13 Considering the overall circumstances as well as on referring the provision of section 107 read with section 306 of IPC, in the opinion of this Court there is no iota of evidence suggesting that due to instigation of the applicants the deceased committed suicide. In that background the continuation of proceedings would amount to nothing but abuse of process of law. 14 Resultantly, the present application is allowed. The impugned FIR registered with Jetpur City Police Station, Rajkot Rural, being I-C.R. No.11213022211360 of 2021 dated 07.10.2021, as well as all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly. (M. K. THAKKER,J) M.M.MIRZA Page 12 of 12 Uploaded by M.M.MIRZA(HC01407) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 25 20:57:07 IST 2026</div>