JUDGMENT

S.K. Palo, J.—These applications (M.Cr.C. No.4069/2014 and M.Cr.C.No.4098/2014) under Sections 482 of Cr.P.C. for invoking the inherent power of this Court seeking quashment of F.I.R.No.89/14 dated 31.3.2014 registered at Police Station G.R.P. railway, Gwalior.

Regard being had similitude in the controversy involved in the matter, the above mentioned cases were heard analogously and a common order is being passed.

2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for disposal of the petitions are Anushri Gupta, sister of the deceased Anuraj Gupta married to Sumit Raj Shivhare, the son of petitioners Ramsevak Shivhare and Smt. Shashi Shivhare and the brother of petitioner Neha Shivhare (after marriage Neha Dixit). Allegedly, Anushri Gupta was being harassed by her in-laws. They were demanding dowry and the same could not be fulfilled by her mother who is a widow and her brother Anurag Gupta. Anurag Gupta leaving a suicide note and allegedly committed suicide in the Rairu Railway crossing. The suicide note was recovered from his pocket which reads as follows:

(Matter in other language)

3. In the suicide note it is mentioned that Anurag Gupta allegedly committed suicide because of demand of dowry and the harassment and cruelty being inflicted to his sister Anushri. This cruelty and harassment to his sister could not be tolerated by him, hence, he committed suicide. He requested to take legal action against these persons responsible for the mental and physical harassment.

4. Police G.P.P. Gwalior, registered Crime No.82/14 under Section 306 of IPC against Sumit Raj, the husband of Anushri Gupta and petitioner Ramsevak(father-in-law) petitioner Shashi Shivhare(mother-in-law) and petitioner Neha (sister-in-law) for allegedly abetting the suicide of Anurag Gupta.

5. On behalf of the petitioners, it is argued that the petitioners have not abetted suicide of Anurag Gupta. The suicide of Anurag Gupta in any circumstances cannot be held to be a suicide abetted by the petitioners. Therefore, the F.I.R. lodged against the petitioners be quashed.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the application on the ground that the petitioners demanded 15,00,000/- rupees as dowry from Anushri Gupta. Her brother deceased Anurag Gupta and mother Usha Gupta could not fulfill the same, therefore, she was driven away from the matrimonial home. Since last five months, she had been staying at her maternal home. Her in-laws refused to accept her till the demand of dowry is not fulfilled. The dowry demand was to be fulfilled by her brother deceased Anurag, he failed to do so and unable to see the pains and suffering of his sister Anushri Gupta, hence committed suicide. Therefore, the petitioners are liable for their crime.

7. At this juncture, it would be appropriate to understand the provision of Section 306 of IPC which reads as under:-

“Section 306, Abetment of suicide - If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

It also necessary to make the position clear as to what actually is abetment. Abetment has been defined under Section 107 of IPC which reads as follows:-

“Section 107, Abetment of a thing- A person abets the doing of a thing, who-

First- Instigates any person to do that thing: or Secondly - Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doding of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly - Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.

Explanation 1 - A person who by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing.

Explanation 2 - Whoe