[MP Mohan Delkar suicide] Bombay High Court quashes FIR against Dadra & Nagar Haveli Administrator Praful Khoda Patel

The Bombay High Court on Thursday quashed the first information report (FIR) filed against the administrator of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, District Magistrate and other authorities booked for allegedly abetting the suicide of independent Member of Parliament (MP) Mohan Delkar. .A bench of Justices Prasanna Varale and Shrikant Kulkarni allowed a batch of petitions filed by the accused persons seeking to quash the FIR registered against them."All FIRs stand quashed. Even connected matters are quashed....Considering all aspects we find merit in the petition. It is a fit case for the court to exercise it’s power under section 482 to prevent abuse of law and the FIR 36/2021 dated 9 March 21 registered by Abhinav Delkar with the Marine Drive police station under section 306, 506, 389,120 B read with section 3 of the scheduled caste scheduled tribe act and atrocity act is set aside,” the Court said. .Delkar, a seven time MP from Dadra and Nagar Haveli had won the 2019 elections as an independent candidate. He was found dead inside a room in Hotel Sea Green South in city's Marine Drive on February 22, 2021.In a 14- page suicide note, Delkar allegedly blamed political pressure for taking the drastic step.Subsequently, an FIR was registered by the Marine Drive police station for offences under Section 306 (abetment of suicide), 506 (criminal intimidation), 389 (putting person in fear of accusation of offence) of the Indian Penal Code.Delkar was allegedly under pressure for a year due to the harassment by the administration of the Union Territory allegedly as per orders of the Administrator Praful Patel, the FIR stated.The petitions considered by the Court were moved by the Administrator of the Union Territory - Praful Khoda Patel, District Magistrate Sandeep Singh, superintendent Sharad Darade, Deputy Magistrate Apurva Sharma, Sub-divisional officer Manasvi Jain, Police Inspector Manoj Patel, territory's Law Secretary Rohit Yadav and BJP leader Fatehsinh Chauhan..The bench found merit in the submission that the deceased was in social and political life for a considerable long period and it is specifically stated in the FIR that deceased faced many adversities in the life boldly."A reference made to the incidents are mostly of the public functions. It was only the impression carried out by the deceased that he was ill-treated or humiliated, on the contrary, there is sufficient material placed on record to show that in view of peculiar circumstances namely, Covid 19 pandemic, these public functions were celebrated by taking the precautionary measures under the various directives and SOPs, to avoid the large gatherings in public places so as to prevent the spread of the virus," the bench observed.The bench while referring to various material places on record, said that there wasn't a proper instance which could be pointed out by the prosecution, wherein the deceased was humiliated or ignored by any of the accused, who are all public servants..The petitioners, however, claimed that the FIR does not mention that Delkar was ever subjected to any grievous hurt, or assault and there was no threat to impose social or economic boycott contemplated in the section."On the contrary, the record show that he has always been given all the dignity and respect which is required to be given to an individual as well as to a Member of Parliament," it was submitted..It was further submitted that the FIR does not satisfy the requisite ingredients of the Section 306 (abetment of suicide) of the IPC and there ought to be instigation or conspiracy to aid the deceased to commit suicide.A mere allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which compelled the person to commit suicide will not sustain, the petitions contended.It was submitted that the administration had never been against the deceased and there was no single incident of the deceased being personally subjected to any legal proceedings by the administration."Every action initiated was pertaining to the official act done by the petitioner and therefore he cannot be held responsible or criminally liable for the same," the plea stated..[Read order]