P. Devadass, J.

1. Petition for bail under Section 439 Cr. PC. Offence alleged under Section 306 IPC.

2. Petitioner is the sole accused in this case.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even taking the allegations as such in the FIR, it would not warrant an offence under Section 306 ISC. There is no intention on the part of the petitioner to abet the commission of suicide by the deceased. Out of emotion and frustration the deceased had committed suicide. For this petitioner cannot be blamed. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner also cited several decisions.

4. According to the learned Government Advocate, petitioner provoked the deceased to commit suicide by saying 'go end die'. He is responsible for her untimely death. He has abetted her commission of suicide.

5. I have anxiously considered the rival submissions, perused the Case-Diary and also perused the several decisions cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. Petitioner is younger brother of deceased Amudha. On 25.2.2015, in her house, Amudha committed suicide. Based on the complaint of her husband Chinnasamy, a case for an offence under section 306 IPC has been registered as against his brother-in-law. He has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

7. Petitioner seeks bail.

8. The offence of abetment to commit suicide is punishable under section 306 IPC.

9. Section 306 IPC provides that if any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be liable to be punished.

10. The ingredients of abetment are set out in Section 107 of IPC. It reads as under:

"107. Abetment of 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 doing 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."

11. In State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal (1994 SCC (Cri.) 107), the Hon'ble Apex Court cautioned as under:-

"The court should be extremely careful in assessing the facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence adduced in the trial for the purpose of findings whether the cruelty meted out to the victim had in fact induced her to end the life by committing suicide. If it appears to the Court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and difference in domestic life, quite common to the society, to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord and difference were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the Court should not be satisfied for basing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty."

12. In State of West Bengal (supra), the Hon'ble supreme Court observed that "If it appears to the Court that a victim committing suicide was hypersensitive to ordinary petulance, discord and difference in domestic life, quite common to the society, to which the victim belonged and such petulance, discord end difference were not expected to induce a similarly circumstanced individual in a given society to commit suicide, the conscience of the Court should satisfied for ha sing a finding that the accused charged of abetting the offence of suicide should be found guilty."

13. In Swamy Prahaladdas v. state of M.P. and another (1995 Supp. (3) SCC 438), a married woman had two paramours. On a morning, all the three had taken tea together, while talking, one of the paramour told the deceased, a married man 'go and die', the deceased went home in a dejected mood and committed suicide. Accused was proceeded with under section 306 IPC that he has abetted his commission of suicide. In the facts and circumstances, the Hon'ble Supreme court did not hold i