The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a close and proximate link between the act constituting abetment and suicide, as emphasized in Section 306 r/w 34 of IPC.

Sheel Nagu, J.

1. The revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 397 r/w S. 401 of Cr.P.C. is invoked for quashment of the charges framed against the petitioners by the trial Court under Section 306 r/w 34 of IPC and also for quashment of the interlocutory order dated 05.03.2015 rejecting the prayer for discharging made by the petitioners u/S. 227, Cr.P.C.

2. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

3. The impugned FIR alleges the said offence against 07 accused including petitioners Shiva Parashar and Rahul Parashar.

4. During investigation, the statements of parents and wife of the deceased were recorded. A suicide note dated 20.08.2013 allegedly written by the deceased was recovered. This suicide note was prima-facie opined by the handwriting expert to be written by the deceased.

5. The suicide note though alleges specific allegations against co-accused namely Vipin Garg, Ashok Parashar, Vicky Shivhare and Gagan Garg. But in regard to both petitioners Shiva Parashar and Rahul Parashar, it is alleged that co-accused Ashok Parashar (father of both the petitioners herein) used to send his sons (petitioners) with other persons to abuse and intimidate the deceased with a view to pressure the deceased to repay the loan extended to him by the father of the petitioners and other co-accused.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner primarily contends that on prima facie reading of material collected by the prosecution pursuant to the alleged impugned FIR the essential ingredients of abetment to suicide are not made out. It is further contended by the petitioner that mere making of demand for re-payment of loan does not constitute instigation, illegal omission or commission or aiding any person so as to constitute abetment as defined u/s. 107 of IPC.

7. In sum and substance learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the basic ingredients of abetment as defined u/s. 107 of IPC are not made out as there is no link much less alive or proximate link between suicide and alleged action of the petitioner in demanding re-payment of loan extended to the deceased.

8. On the other hand, learned State counsel sought dismissal of the petition on the ground that sufficient material was available with the prosecution to not only lodge the FIR against the petitioner and other co-accused u/s. 306/34 of IPC but also to prosecute them in the trial court by filing of the charge sheet.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner, respondents- State and victim have placed reliance on various decisions of Apex Court and this Court in support of their rival submissions, namely the cases of Babbi @ Jitendra & Ors. v. State of M.P. reported in : 2008 (III) MPWN SN 8, Ramchandra S/o Jagannath Singh Kushwaha v. State of M.P. reported in : 2009 (2) MPLJ 147, Vivek Kumar Jain & Anr. v. State of M.P. & Anr. reported in : 2015 (1) MPHT 75, Radheshyam v. State of M.P. Thro' Police Station Singroli, Neemuch (M.P.) reported in 2014 Cr.L.R (MP) 416, Manoj Mahavir Prasad Khaitan v. Ram Gopal Poddar and Anr. reported in : (2010) 10 SCC 673, Sathish Mehra v. State of N.C.T of Delhi and Anr. reported in : AIR 2013 SC 506, Umesh Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in : AIR 2014 SC 1106, Didigam Bikshapathi & Anr. v. State of A.P. reported in : AIR 2008 SC 527, Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) reported in : (2010) 3 SCC (Cr.) 367, Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander and Anr. reported in : (2013) 1 SCC (Cr.) 986 & Suresh alias Pappu Bhudharmal Kalani v. State of Maharashtra reported in : (2001) SCC (Cr.) 621.

10. To analyze this submission of learned counsel for the rival parties, it would be appropriate to refer the relevant statutory provisions.

11. The offence u/s. 306 of IPC which for convenience and ready reference is reproduced herein below :-

"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 e