MAHIPATSINH DADUBHAI BASIYA vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET
ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 5972 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
================================================
MAHIPATSINH DADUBHAI BASIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================
Appearance:
MR MK POOJARA for MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the
Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. SHIVANGI M RANA(7053) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
Date : 03/09/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This application under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 (the Code) is preferred by the applicant praying to
quash the FIR being C.R. No. I-106 of 2014 dated 08.11.2014,
lodged before Talala Police Station, Dist.: Gir Somnath City for the
Page 1 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
offence punishable under Section 306 r/w. 114 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 5, 40 and 42 of the Gujarat Money
Lenders Act, 2011.
2. Succinctly stated the facts of the prosecution case are that
brother of the de facto complainant namely Bhagvanjibhai
Bhikhabhai Sojitra committed suicide by hanging, allegedly on
account of intense pressure to recover the amount of Rs.23 lakh
which was availed by the deceased as loan on interest from the
accused persons against a land belonging to him. On the said
facts, the FIR in question came to be registered.
3. Heard, learned advocate for the applicant – accused, the
learned advocate for the respondent No. 2 - de facto complainant
and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent
No. 1 – State.
3.1 At the outset, the learned advocate for the applicant would
submit that the applicant is not named in the FIR nor his name is
there in the suicide note of the deceased and only on the basis of
one transaction which was entered into between the deceased and
the present applicant, the applicant is dragged into the crime in
question.
3.2 It is submitted that the deceased had taken money from
several persons by executing Agreement to Sell on the same
Page 2 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
property being lad and later on, he either cancelled the same or to
execute Agreement to Sell with another person. Some of the
instances are: Agreement to Sell dated 29.08.2011, registered on
30.08.2011, which got cancelled by a Cancellation Deed dated
29.08.2012, copies of which are produced on record. Again, on the
very same day i.e . 29.08.2012 another Agreement to Sell came to be
executed in favour of other person. It is submitted that the
deceased had executed an Agreement to Sell in favour of the
present applicant on 19.06.2013, for which, a Cancellation Deed
was executed on 07.01.2014 and on the very same day, the land
was sold by way of a registered Sale Deed to another person.
Thus, it is submitted that the deceased had entered into various
transactions with different persons and thereby, availed money
and thus, arraignment of the present applicant is false.
3.3 The learned advocate would further submit that Cancellation
Deed between the deceased and the applicant came to be executed
on 07.01.2014, however, the deceased committed suicide on
06.11.2014 and thus, there is not proximate cause so as to attract
the provisions of Section 306 of the IPC.
3.4 The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that there
is no allegations, worth the name, with regard to an offence under
the Gujarat Money Lenders Act either in the FIR or in the Suicide
Note and thus, merely, on the basis of an Agreement to Sell, which
was also cancelled much prior in point of time, the applicant
Page 3 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
cannot be dragged into the alleged offence.
3.5 The sum and substance of the arguments of the learned
advocate for the applicant is that the ingredients of the offences
alleged against the present applicant, are not at all satisfied.
3.6 It is submitted that even otherwise the accused who are
named in the FIR as well as one other accused, have been
acquitted by the trial Court by way of a judgment and order dated
28.05.2018 passed in Sessions Case No. 29 of 2016 by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Veraval, District: Gir Somnath, after
full-fledged trial and accordingly, it is submitted that when the
main accused, who are named in the FIR have been acquitted,
continuation of proceedings against the present applicant, against
whom, there is nothing on record to show his complicity, would
be an exercise in futility and accordingly, it is urged that this
application may be allowed.
4. As against that, the learned advocate for the respondent No.
2 - de facto complainant would submit that Charge-sheet in the case
has already been filed wherein, the present applicant has been
shown in Column No. 2 as an Absconder. It is further submitted
that whether the offence alleged, more particularly, under the
Gujarat Money Lenders Act is made out or not against the present
applicant and whether the applicant exerted pressure upon the
deceased which drove him to commit suicide, is a matter of trial
Page 4 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
which cannot be decided at this stage and accordingly, it is urged
that this application may not be entertained.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State would
submit that there are several antecedents against the applicant and
when prima facie case is made out against the applicant, though not
named in the FIR however, his name was surfaced during the
investigation, exercise of discretion under Section 482 of the Code
is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as the
learned advocate for the de facto complainant would further submit
that as per the settled law of the land, inherent powers under
Section 482 of the Code should be used sparingly and with a view
to curb the abuse of process of law. It is submitted that in the case
on hand, a prima facie case is made out against the applicant and
hence, they requested that it is ultimately a matter of trial after
which, the truth could be churned out and hence, it is requested
not to entertain this application and it is reiterated to be dismissed.
7. Heard the learned advocates for the parties and perused the
material placed on record.
8. Prior to assessing the factual matrix on the touchstone of
criminal jurisprudence, it is apposite to reinforce the settled legal
position governing the scope, ambit, and limits of the inherent
Page 5 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
jurisdiction vested under Section 482 of the Code. The
jurisprudential parameters regulating the exercise of this
extraordinary power have been authoritatively catalogued by
Hon’ble Supreme Court in a long line of precedents, chief among
them being the authoritative in the case of State of Haryana v.
Bhajan Lal [AIR 1992 SC 604] . Therein, Hon’ble Supreme Court
crystallized seven distinct, illustrative categories of cases where
judicial intervention under Section 482 of the Code or Article 226
of the Constitution is necessitated to secure the ends of justice and
clip any abuse of the process of Court. The relevant portion of
Paragraph 102 of the said judgment is extracted below:
“ 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
channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give
an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power
should be exercised.
(1) 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.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report
Page 6 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
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.
(3) 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.
(4) 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.
(5) 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.
(6) 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 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.
(7) 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.”
8.1 Evaluating the present application on the anvil of the
Page 7 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
principles enunciated in Bhajan Lal (supra) , this Court has to
determine whether the allegations in the FIR, even when accepted
at face value, satisfy the essential statutory ingredients of offence
alleged against the applicant. This Court must ensure that criminal
machinery is not permitted to degenerate into an engine of
harassment where liability under criminal law is completely
absent.
8.2 The applicant has sought quashment of the said FIR on the
ground that he is not named in the FIR and that, the accused who
are named in the FIR as well as one other accused, have already
been acquitted by the trial Court after full-fledged trial and that,
even if the allegations levelled in the FIR are taken in entirety, no
ingredients of the offence alleged against the present applicant, are
satisfied
8.3 It is the undisputed position in the case on hand that the
present applicant is not named in the FIR nor is there any
reference of the present applicant in the suicide note of the
deceased.
8.4 It appears that merely on the basis of an Agreement to Sell
entered into between the applicant and the deceased dated
19.06.2013, the applicant is arraigned in the crime in question.
However, the fact remains that the said Agreement to Sell is also
got cancelled vide Cancellation Deed, which was executed on
Page 8 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
07.01.2014, and thereafter, on the very same day i.e. 07.01.2014, the
deceased executed a Sale Deed in favour of another person.
Further, the deceased committed suicide on 06.11.2014 and thus,
there is nothing on record to suggest that there is any proximate
cause that drive the deceased to commit suicide.
8.5 At this juncture, if the decision of the Apex Court in Abhinav
Mohan Delkar v. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2026) 6 SCC
233 : 2025 (0) AIJEL-SC 75740 is referred to, it is held in paragraphs
25, 26, and 27 as under:
“25. What comes out essentially from the various decisions herein
before cited is that, even if there is allegation of constant
harassment, continued over a long period; to bring in the
ingredients of Section 306 read with Section 107, still there
has to be a proximate prior act to clearly find that the
suicide was the direct consequence of such continuous
harassment, the last proximate incident having finally
driven the subject to the extreme act of taking one’s life .
Figuratively, ‘the straw that broke the camel’s back’; that final
event, in a series, that occasioned a larger, sudden impact resulting
in the unpredictable act of suicide. What drove the victim to that
extreme act, often depends on individual predilections; but whether
it is goaded, definitively and demonstrably, by a particular act of
another, is the test to find mens rea. Merely because the victim
was continuously harassed and at one point, he or she
succumbed to the extreme act of taking his life cannot by
itself result in finding a positive instigation constituting
abetment. Mens rea cannot be gleaned merely by what goes
on in the mind of the victim .
26. The victim may have felt that there was no alternative
Page 9 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
or option, but to take his life, because of what another
person did or said; which cannot lead to a finding of mens
rea and resultant abetment on that other person. What
constitutes mens rea is the intention and purpose of the
alleged perpetrator as discernible from the conscious acts or
words and the attendant circumstances, which in all
probability could lead to such an end. The real intention of
the accused and whether he intended by his action to at least
possibly drive the victim to suicide, is the sure test. Did the
thought of goading the victim to suicide occur in the mind of
the accused or whether it can be inferred from the facts and
circumstances arising in the case, as the true test of mens rea
would depend on the facts of each case. The social status, the
community setting, the relationship between the parties and
other myriad factors would distinguish one case from
another. However harsh or severe the harassment, unless
there is a conscious deliberate intention, mens rea, to drive
another person to suicidal death, there cannot be a finding of
abetment under Section 306 .
27. We have already seen that even a rebuke to “go, kill
yourself”; often a rustic expression against distasteful
conduct, cannot by itself be found to have the ingredients to
charge an offence of abetment to suicide. There is no
uniformity in how different individuals respond and react
under pressure. Many stand up, some fight back, a few
runaway and certain people crumble and at times take the
extreme step of suicide. To put the blame on the pressure
imposed and the person responsible for it, at all times,
without something more to clearly discern an intention,
would not be the proper application of the penal provisions
under Section 306. ”
(emphasis supplied)
8.6 Thus, assuming for a moment that the present applicant
exerted pressure upon the deceased to recover money, then too,
Page 10 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
there is no proximate prior act to hold the applicant liable for the
suicide of the deceased being direct consequence of such
continuous harassment by the applicant and merely because the
applicant and the deceased had earlier in point of time executed an
Agreement to Sell, and only on bald allegation that to recover the
amount, the applicant was exerting pressure upon the deceased
and the deceased succumbed to the extreme act of taking his life,
cannot, by itself, result in finding a positive instigation constituting
abetment under Section 107 IPC. Thus, there cannot be any mens
rea based on what was perceived by the deceased which went into
his mind while committing suicide, though the victim might have
thought that ending his life would be the only option to come to
end from the pressure which he was facing, cannot lead to hold
that the applicant was having mens rea and resultantly, amounting
to abetment, since, to constitute mens rea intention and purpose of
the applicant from their act has to come on record and also
considering the attendant circumstances, which in all probability
could lead to such an extreme step of committing suicide by the
deceased, in absence of any material on record, asking the
applicant to face the trial would amount to abuse of process of law
inasmuch as the FIR is silent on these aspects.
8.7 Further, as the ingredients of the substantive offence
punishable under Sections 306 of the IPC are not satisfied as
referred to herein above, Section 114 IPC would not apply.
Page 11 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026
R/CR.MA/5972/2015 (GJHC240502812015) JUDGMENT DATED: 03/09/2026
8.8 At this juncture, the Court cannot lose sight and to reiterate
the fact that the accused named in the FIR and one other accused
of the same crime, have been acquitted by the trial Court after full-
fledged trial by giving benefit of doubt. In the circumstances,
present application deserves favourable consideration.
9. In fine , this application succeeds and is hereby allowed. FIR
being C.R. No. I-106 of 2014 dated 08.11.2014, lodged before Talala
Police Station, Dist.: Gir Somnath City for the offence punishable
under Section 306 r/w. 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and
Sections 5, 40 and 42 of the Gujarat Money Lenders Act, 2011 with
all consequential criminal proceedings emanating therefrom, are
quashed and set aside qua the present applicant only.
9.1 Rule is made absolute, accordingly. Direct service is
permitted.
[ P. M. Raval, J. ]
hiren/11tss3926
Page 12 of 12
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Thu Sep 03 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Sep 03 19:00:46 IST 2026