The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a prima facie satisfaction of the court about the existence of sufficient grounds to proceed in a matter involving the offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 IPC.

Karuna Nand Bajpayee, J.

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of charge sheet dated 21.7.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 19315 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 240 of 2018, State of U.P. versus Manoj alias Monu and others, u/s 306 IPC, P.S. Ecotech-III, District Gautam Budh Nagar pending in the court below.

2. Heard applicants' counsel and learned AGA.

3. Entire record has been perused.

4. Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the allegations as have been made do not constitute the offence under Section 306 IPC and as more than seven years had elapsed after the marriage, therefore, no legal presumption against the accused persons can be drawn. Learned counsel for the applicants has further contended that there is no direct evidence on the basis of which it may be said that the applicants abetted or instigated the commission of suicide. The argument is that the deceased was in the phase of depression as a result of which she had committed suicide with nobody being contributory from the accused side to have caused it.

5. Many other contentions raised by the applicants' counsel relate to disputed questions of fact. The court has also been called upon to adjudge the testimonial worth of prosecution evidence and evaluate the same on the basis of various intricacies of factual details which have been touched upon by the learned counsel. The veracity and credibility of material furnished on behalf of the prosecution has been questioned and false implication has been pleaded.

6. The law regarding sufficiency of material which may justify the summoning of accused and also the court's decision to proceed against him in a given case is well settled. The court has to eschew itself from embarking upon a roving enquiry into the last details of the case. It is also not advisable to adjudge whether the case shall ultimately end in conviction or not. Only a prima facie satisfaction of the court about the existence of sufficient ground to proceed in the matter is required.

7. Through a catena of decisions given by Hon'ble Apex Court this legal aspect has been expatiated upon at length and the law that has evolved over a period of several decades is too well settled. The cases of (1) Chandra Deo Singh Vs. Prokash Chandra Bose, (1963) AIR SC 1430, (2) Vadilal Panchal Vs. Dattatraya Dulaji Ghadigaonker, (1960) AIR SC 1113 and (3) Smt. Nagawwa Vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi, (1976) 3 SCC 736 may be usefully referred to in this regard.

8. The Apex Court decisions given in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, (1960) AIR SC 866 and in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, (1992) SCC(Cri) 426 have also recognized certain categories by way of illustration which may justify the quashing of a complaint or charge sheet. Some of them are akin to the illustrative examples given in the above referred case of Smt. Nagawwa Vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi, (1976) 3 SCC 736. The cases where the allegations made against the accused or the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer do not constitute any offence or where the allegations are absurd or extremely improbable impossible to believe or where prosecution is legally barred or where criminal proceeding is malicious and malafide instituted with ulterior motive of grudge and vengeance alone may be the fit cases for the High Court in which the criminal proceedings may be quashed. Hon'ble Apex Court in Bhajan Lal's case has recognized certain categories in which Section-482 of Cr.P.C. or Article-226 of the Constitution may be successfully invoked.

9. Illumined by the case law referred to herein above, this Court has adverted to the entire record of the case.

10. The allegations, in brief, as reflect from perusal of the record are that the daughter of opposite party no.2 namely, Sweeti alias Mona aged about 27 years was married to the son of applicant no.1 and brother of applicant no.2 namely, Manoj alia