Today in New Delhi, India
Jun 26, 2019-Wednesday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

SC strikes down suicide abetment case against Aurangabad education official

It held that the allegations in the FIR were inadequate and do not satisfy the requirements of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code

mumbai Updated: May 29, 2018 00:05 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
Hindustan Times
Aurangabad suicide,Aurangabad deputy director of education,Kishor Parashar

The Supreme Court has struck down a suicide abetment case against a deputy director of education from Aurangabad, saying a superior officer cannot be booked simply because he took departmental action against one of his juniors who took his own life.

“The exigencies of work and the situation may call for certain action on part of a superior including stopping of salary of a junior officer for a month,” the Supreme Court said while striking down the prosecution of Vaijnath Khandke. “That action simplicitor cannot be considered to be a pointer against such superior officer.”

In August 2017, the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) police station at the City and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO) in Aurangabad had booked Khandke and one of his colleagues, Vidya Ghorpade, under Section 306 for abetting the suicide of Kishor Parashar — who was also an officer with the education department. The first information report (FIR) was registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by Parashar’s wife, accusing Khandke and Ghorpade of mentally torturing her husband.

She alleged that Khandke made her husband work for more than twelve hours a day, besides calling him for duty at odd hours and even on holidays. She also claimed that Parashar was compelled to complete the work allocated to Ghorpade. Even after he did the extra work, Parashar’s wife claimed, his boss did not pay his salary for a month and also threatened to stop his increments.

Both, Khandke and Ghorpade had approached Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court. The high court struck down Ghorpade’s prosecution, but refused any relief to Khandke, thus compelling him to approach the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court held that the allegations in the FIR were inadequate and do not satisfy the requirements of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). “The facts on record in the present case are completely inadequate and insufficient. As a superior officer, if some work was assigned by the applicant to the deceased, merely on that count it cannot be said that there was any guilty mind or criminal intent.”

First Published: May 29, 2018 00:04 IST