A.P. Bhangale, J.

1. The applicant prayed for to quash and set aside FIR bearing no 44 of 2012 dated 16-03-2012 registered under Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Mangrulpir Police station, District Washim against the applicant,Chaitanya Neval, Manoj Janjal,and Swapnil Tayade.

2. The case against the applicant is that a girl Miss Ekta Ajabrao Pradhan aged about 18 years resident of Shahapur Taluka Taluka Mangarulpir decided to commit suicide at her residence by pouring kerosene on her body and setting herself ablaze on 29-02-2012 at about 10.00 p.m. While she was receiving medical treatment at Sarvopchar Rugnalaya at Akola, her dying declaration was recorded by Executive Magistrate, Akola at about 7.30 a.m. after obtaining endorsement from the doctor attending the patient Ekta, about her fitness and consciousness to give statement in the nature of dying declaration. Ekta made a statement on oath that she had poured kerosene on her body and burnt herself due to the one-sided love by Chaitanya Newal while she did not love him. He used to harass her as he was exerting pressure upon her to love him. She had informed about this to her family members. Friends of Chaitanya, namely Manoj Janjal, Swapnil Tayade and Girish were also mentally harassing her. Fed up with their harassment she burnt herself. Doctor had certified consciousness of the maker of the statement during declaration. Police had recorded statement of witnesses who stated about the oral dying declaration made by Ekata in identical terms.

3. Learned Advocate Shri Dhengale argued that it is really unfortunate that a girl who out of frustration ended her own life but unless there is any material to show that the accused has abetted suicide by any act or omission which caused the incident of suicide, there is no ground to proceed further against him in the court. With this submission he invited our attention to the ruling in Madan Mohan Singh Vs. State of Gujrat reported in (2010) 8 SCC 628 to argue that proceedings were quashed in the absence of material to base prosecution under Sections 306 and 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code. We have perused the ruling. In that petition the accused/appellant had challenged the First Information Report (FIR) registered as C.R. No. 166 of 2008 at Naranpura Police Station. The said FIR was a long document which has been filed by one Harshida Ben, widow of Krishnalal Joshi. It was apparent from the said report that she was married to Deepakbhai Krishnalal Joshi serving in Ahmadabad Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. as a driver in the Microwave Project Department. He had undergone a heart bypass surgery in the year 2002 and he was asked by the doctor to avoid lifting heavy weights. She further stated that the appellant, Madan Mohan Singh was working as a D.E.T. and her husband who was driving a Tata Sumo car was working under Madan Mohan Singh (accused herein). She then complained that Madan Mohan Singh used to tell his private errands to her husband and was harassing him. Though Madan Mohan Singh was transferred, yet he kept on continuously using her husband. In the year 2007, Madam Mohan Singh came back on transfer in the Microwave Project as D.E.T. It is alleged that on the day when Madan Mohan Singh joined, he told her husband to keep the keys of the vehicle on the table. However, according to her, her husband did not listen to that and took back the key on account of which Madan Mohan Singh had become angry and had threatened her husband of suspending him. He also rebuked her husband that if he did not listen to him, he would create difficulties for her husband. Madan Mohan Singh said to her husband as how he is still alive in spite of the insults. It is then contended that on 21.2.2008, her husband left at 10 o’clock as per rules with tiffin but did not return back in the evening and, therefore, his search was taken by his son Jatin from his colleagues like Raji Saheb and his absence was reported to the poli