JUDGMENT :

1. As common questions of law and facts are involved in both the criminal revisions, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The instant revisions have been preferred by the applicants against the impugned order dated 08/04/2019 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) in Sessions Trial No.21/2019, whereby the Trial Court has framed charge against the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to the case of prosecution, on Mahaveer Chourdiya (deceased) committed suicide by jumping before the train on 10/02/2018. It is alleged that the deceased was a finance broker. During the financial transaction and day-to-day affair it led to some financial liability, as such the applicants/accused Ashok Lohia and Vinod Lohia (applicant No.1 and applicant No.2 respectively in Cr.R.No.546/2019) started pressuring the deceased to returned the amount. Threat was continuously extended that image of the deceased would be tarnished in the society as also family members would be subjected to some attack and family members would be maligned. Frequency of such demand aggravated, eventually the deceased committed suicide. Before committing suicide, the deceased had written a suicidal note (Annexure P2) and also sent a Whatsapp audio clip on social media wherein the deceased had made allegations against the present applicants/accused. On the basis of the above information, the brother of the deceased lodged an FIR on 13/02/2018. After completion of the investigation, police filed a chargesheet before the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajnandgaon from where the matter being triable by the Court of Sessions committed to the learned Trial Court. Vide impugned order dated 08/04/2019, the Trial Court framed the charge as mentioned hereinabove. Hence, Cr.R.No.546/2019 has been preferred by the applicants namely Ashok Lohia and Vinod Lohia and Cr.R.No.555/2019 has been preferred by applicant Kamal Kishore.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicants in both the cases submitted that in the entire charge-sheet there is no material available to frame charge against the applicants/accused for the alleged offence punishable under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code and as such the learned Sessions Judge has committed manifest illegality in framing the charge against the applicants/accused. It is further submitted by them that there is no proximity and nexus between the conduct and behaviour of the applicants/accused with that of the suicide committed by the deceased. They further submitted that even if the evidence on record is taken as it is, the only thing that is established is that the deceased had borrowed money from the applicants/accused and he was under pressure for repayment of loan amount as a result of which the deceased was on frustration and decided to commit suicide for which the applicants/accused cannot be held guilty. On bare perusal of the entire charge-sheet, no case under Section 306/34 of Indian Penal Code and no ingredients of Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the applicants/accused. It is further submitted that on a plain reading of the suicidal note of the deceased and Whatsapp audio clip reflects that the deceased was in great stress. The suicidal note as well as the Whatsapp audio clip does not reflect any ingredients to frame the case against the applicants/accused for framing the charge under Section 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Reliance has been placed by the learned Counsel in AIR 1972 SC 545 (Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd v. The State of Maharashtra); 2010 CRI. L.J 2110 (Gangula Mohan Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh); (2017) 1 SCC 433 (Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab); (2019) 3 SCC 315 (M. Arjunan v. State Represented by its Inspector of Police. Reliance has also been place on some of the judgments passed by this Court as well as co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

5. On the other hand, learned Co