The judgment emphasizes the requirement of a proximate link between the alleged acts of the accused and the suicide by the deceased, as well as the need for clear mens rea to commit the offence under IPC 306 read with 107.

JUDGMENT :

Manish Pitale J.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the rival parties.

(2) The petitioner is one of the two accused persons in First Information Report (FIR) No. 429 of 2021, dated 24/09/2021, registered at Police Station, Parva, Taluka–Ghatanji, District–Yavatmal, for offence under Section 306 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The present writ petition is filed seeking quashing of the aforesaid FIR and charge-sheet filed in pursuance thereof.

(3) The facts leading up to filing of the present writ petition are that – one Kavadu Sambhaji Tiple, committed suicide on 14/09/2021 by hanging himself on a tree in an agricultural field, within the jurisdiction of the aforesaid Police Station. The son-in-law of the deceased i.e. Mahadev Narayan Kamble caused the FIR to be registered after 10 days on 24/09/2021, against the petitioner and her mother. A perusal of the report, leading to registration of the FIR, shows that it is based almost entirely on the contents of two suicide notes found on the person of the deceased. The contents of the two suicide notes are identical, wherein the deceased stated that he was fed up with life and constrained to take the extreme step because of the petitioner and her mother. On this basis, the FIR stood registered and police undertook investigation.

(4) During the course of investigation, the police recorded statements of witnesses and took the suicide notes on record. The charge-sheet was filed on 27/11/2021 and it was stated therein that the material on record pointed towards the guilt of the petitioner and her mother for offence under Section 306 read with 34 of the IPC. Much emphasis was placed on the suicide note dated 09/09/2021. This Court issued notice in the present writ petition, wherein the respondent No.1 State appeared through the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. The respondent No.2 i.e. original informant/ complainant was served, but he chose not to appear before this Court.

(5) Mr. A. M. Sudame, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that even if the FIR, charge-sheet and the material available on record were to be taken into consideration, the ingredients of the offence under Section 306 of the IPC were not made out against the petitioner and that therefore, the FIR and the chargesheet deserved to be quashed. It was submitted that, applying the position of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Court in various judgments as regards offence under Section 306 of the IPC, even if the contents of the suicide note allegedly left behind by the deceased were to be accepted, ingredients of the offence under Section 306 of the IPC were not made out, because the essential aspect of abetment as defined under Section 107 of the IPC was absent and it could not be said that the petitioner before this Court was even prima facie liable for instigating the deceased to commit suicide. Reference was made to a number of judgments in support of the aforesaid contentions, which will be referred to at the appropriate place hereinafter.

(6) The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Sections 107 and 306 of the IPC and read the suicide note in detail, to submit that at worst the contents thereof brought out the anguish of the deceased in respect of the demands for share in property made by the co-accused i.e. mother of the petitioner, allegedly at the behest of the petitioner. It was submitted that the demands made by the mother of the petitioner, even if at the instigation of the petitioner, could at worst be said to be demands that the accused persons thought were genuine and it could not be said that such demands were made with the intention to drive the deceased to commit suicide. It was further submitted that there was no proximity between the suicide note, which was written on 09/09/2021 and the actual act, which took place on 14/09/2021. On this basis it was submitted that the prese