To establish abetment of suicide, there must be clear instigation or encouragement by the accused, which was absent in this case.

JUDGMENT :

(J.C. DOSHI, J.)

1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ”the Code”), the petitioners have prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR being C.R.No.I – 212 of 2017 registered with Rajkot B Division Police Station, for the offences punishable under Section 306 of the IPC as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the petitioner herein.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under:-

3. That on 30.9.2017 her son Divyesh alongwith his friend who are studying together in the school at about 3 O'clock in the afternoon playing with camera which was rented by them. It is stated that at about 6 O'clock a phone call was received and the person to whom camera belongs he has asked to return the same and asked to keep with the adjoining shop owner. It is stated that after 3 days one Nirav who resides in Arjun Society along with his friend Keyur both came and informed that the camera which was taken by son of the complainant some damage was made and it was asked to deposit expenses of the same. It is stated that after 3/4 days Divyesh has informed that one Nirav used to call him frequently that there is no damage in the camera, in spite of the same Rs.6,000/- is asked and the son Divyesh was pressurized to pay the amount. It is stated that mother has thereafter informed the son that since camera was taken on rent by all friends together the amount would be equally distributed and to pay the amount. It is stated that at about 4 O'clock again a phone call of Nirav came and Nirav was asked to come in the evening again he has requested to pay the amount of expenses of camera and if payment is not made threat was given. It is submitted that son of the complainant thereafter left and that on his phone ring was made; however nobody has lifted but subsequently the complainant came to know that Divyesh has committed suicide.

4. Learned advocate Mr Dagli, for the petitioner referring to the FIR in question would submit that the minor dispute has entailed in major result of suicide by the deceased. He would further submit that according to the FIR, Juvenile accused has given camera to the deceased and the petitioner accompanied the juvenile accused. He would further submit that according to the FIR, the functioning of the camera was disturbed subsequent to the use by the deceased and therefore, according to the FIR, the deceased was pressurized to pay the amount of repairing the camera, which resulted into committal of suicide. He would further submit that essential ingredients of offence under section 306 of the IPC are completely missing in the present case. He would for the submit that there is no instigation, which lead the deceased to commit suicide. He would further submit that the facts stated in the FIR are so hazy which does not constitute demand of Rs.6000/- from the deceased for repairing the camera and therefore, there is no act on the part of the petitioner which could lead the deceased to commit suicide. He would further submit that the FIR is also filed belatedly, after 15 days of the incident which indicates that the FIR is filed after due deliberation and consultation and designed to implicate the accused for the offence under section 306 of the IPC.

5. To buttress his submission, learned advocate Mr. Dagli has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of GM Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2010 SCW 337 and in case of AK Chaudhary Vs. the State of Gujarat, 2005(3) GLH 444.

6. The above submission is made by learned advocate Mr Dagli to allow the petition.

7. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Dave appearing for the complainant would submit that since the petitioner has approached this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash the FIR at threshold, in absence of the investigation in regards to the office, it cannot be said that there is no instigation which prompted the decease